beta
Text
1. The Defendants shall pay the Plaintiff the following money:
A. Defendant A shall be KRW 36,872,663 and KRW 34,264,525 among them.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On January 4, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a credit guarantee agreement with Defendant A, with the same content as the credit guarantee agreement until January 5, 2015, and issued the same credit guarantee certificate.
(hereinafter “instant credit guarantee”). Defendant A obtained a loan from the National Housing Fund (hereinafter “instant loan”) with the said credit guarantee form as security from the Bank of Korea (hereinafter “instant loan”).
B. According to the credit guarantee agreement of this case, in case where a person who received a credit guarantee is not released from the liability for the performance of the guaranteed obligation as the person who received the credit guarantee fails to pay immediately the amount of money, damages, and expenses incidental thereto when the Plaintiff performed the guaranteed obligation, and the person who received the credit guarantee fails to discharge the guaranteed obligation by the due date, he may collect additional guarantee fees from the person who received the credit guarantee for the unpaid amount of the obligation guaranteed by the person who received the credit guarantee. The expenses required for the execution, exercise,
The rate of damages determined by the Plaintiff is 12% per annum from December 1, 2012 to August 31, 2015, and 8% per annum from the next day to that of the date.
C. On November 29, 2013, Defendant A lost the benefit of the term of the instant loan. Upon the request of the Bank of Korea, the Plaintiff subrogated to the Bank of Korea for KRW 52,140,660 of the remaining interest and interest on the instant loan, and collected KRW 17,876,135 on December 11, 2015 and collected KRW 34,264,525, and the remaining amount of subrogated payment is KRW 2,310,508, and the legal procedure cost is KRW 297,630.
Defendant C, etc. is willing to obtain money by deceiving a bank by deceiving a loan on a deposit basis as if the lessee entered into a false lease contract and manipulates documents as if the lessee works for the company. Defendant D is a financial hub, Defendant E is a general manager of the work of false loan, and Defendant G is a lessee according to his direction.