Whether one of the obligors jointly and severally liable falls under corporate bonds in the absence of business inspection;

In the event that only one of the obligors jointly and severally liable conducts a business inspection, and the remaining persons are issued a business inspection or do not conduct a business, the obligation of the obligors jointly and severally liable for the business inspection shall be subject to the business inspection, and the obligation of the obligors jointly and severally liable for the business operation shall fall under the corporate bonds stipulated in the emergency order on the stabilization and growth of the economy on August 2, 1972, but the obligation of the obligors jointly and severally liable for the business operation, which is not so, shall have the relative effect in light of the nature of

§ 10, Article 13 of the Emergency Decree on Economic Stabilization and Growth

Supreme Court Decision 74Da2248 delivered on September 23, 1975 (Supreme Court Decision 11039 delivered on June 23, 1975; Supreme Court Decision 23Noh3rd citizen10 delivered on September 23, 197; Decision 10(5)175 delivered on July 23, 197; Decision 523Noh861

Plaintiff

Defendant 1 and one other

Seoul Central District Court (73Gahap777) in the first instance trial

The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The Defendants, as to the real estate stated in the attached list, will implement the procedure for registration of cancellation of ownership transfer registration for the reason of the sale on April 3 of the same year as the receipt of the Seodaemun District District Court Registry No. 79965, Dec. 30, 72.

The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the defendants.

The part against the plaintiff in the original judgment shall be revoked.

Paragraph 1 of the claim and the costs of the lawsuit are to be borne by the defendants in both the first and second instances.

The provisional registration was completed to preserve the right to claim ownership transfer registration due to the purchase and sale reservation of the same day by the Seodaemun District Court No. 15104 of Apr. 3, 72.3, Seodaemun District Court's receipt of Seodaemun District Court's receipt of the register office on the real estate stated in the attached list, and with respect to other real estate owned by Nonparty 1, the provisional registration based on the purchase and sale reservation of the same day was completed in the above court No. 15103, and there is no dispute between the parties.

The gist of the plaintiff's assertion is that the non-party 1 was the plaintiff's wife, and the non-party 2 was the non-party 1's name and the non-party 2's name and the non-party 1's name and the non-party 4's name and the non-party 2's name and the non-party 7's name and the non-party 1's name and the non-party 2's name and the non-party 1's name and the non-party 2's name and the non-party 1's name and the non-party 2's name and the non-party 4's name and the non-party 7's name and the non-party 2's name and the non-party 1's name and the non-party 2's name and the non-party 2's name and the non-party 3's name and the above non-party 4's name and the non-party 2's name and the above non-party 1's name and the defendant 2's name.

According to the above, the plaintiff is jointly and severally liable with the non-party 1 to pay the defendants a monetary loan amount of KRW 4,00,000 and interest thereon. The above non-party's obligation to the defendants of the non-party constitutes a corporate bond of the above order, but the above reasons for the non-party's joint and several obligation are relative in the nature of joint and several obligation, and the above reasons for the non-party are only relative in the nature of joint and several obligation, so it does not affect the defendant's exercise of the claim against the plaintiff. Therefore, the defendants, the creditor, can independently claim the payment of the whole amount of the debt against the plaintiff, and based on the war telephone, it is legitimate that the registration was completed in the future of the defendants for the purpose of collateral for the real estate owned by the plaintiff.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of the principal lawsuit shall be dismissed without merit, and the original judgment with the same conclusion is just and without merit, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition with respect to the burden of litigation costs at the losing party's expense.

Judges Lee Ho-ho (Presiding Judge)