beta
Text
1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.
2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. B entered into a credit card contract with the Korea Exchange Bank, and accordingly received and used a credit card.
The defendant agreed to jointly and severally guarantee B's credit card usage payment obligation between Korea Exchange Bank and Korea Exchange Bank.
B. On November 3, 2006, Korea Exchange Bank (hereinafter “Korea Exchange Bank”) (hereinafter “Korea Exchange Bank”) (hereinafter “Korea Exchange Bank”) (hereinafter “Korea Exchange Bank”) transferred in sequence to the Plaintiff the credit card use-price claim against the Plaintiff on July 29, 2010. On February 12, 2016, Korea Exchange Bank and Sobre Savings Bank notified the Defendant of each of the above assignment claims by mail.
C. Meanwhile, on the other hand, on December 9, 2005, the Korea Exchange Bank filed a lawsuit against the defendant and B claiming that the defendant and B pay the credit card price for the credit card use price for the credit card use price for the credit card use price for the credit card (Yancheon District Court Decision 2005Gau131861), and the above court rendered a favorable judgment of the Korea Exchange Bank Co., Ltd. on June 9, 2006 (hereinafter “the instant judgment”). The instant judgment became final and conclusive on July 5, 2006.
B on Nov. 20, 2008, filed an application for personal bankruptcy and exemption (the case number of the exemption application case is 2008, 10653, Incheon District Court 2008, 10653) including the above credit card payment obligation, and the above court decided to declare bankruptcy and discontinue the bankruptcy on May 21, 2009, and decided to grant exemption on Oct. 13, 2009.
E. As of August 24, 2016, the obligation to use the credit card as of August 24, 2016 remains 71,318,869 won in total as principal and interest of KRW 17,68,150, interest of KRW 53,630,719.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, 7, and 8, and purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the legitimacy of a subsequent appeal
A. Article 173(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “If a party was unable to observe the peremptory term due to any cause not attributable to him/her, it shall be deemed that.