logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.05.11 2015가단127313
구상금
Text

1. As to KRW 30,081,917 and KRW 29,500,00 among the Plaintiff, the Defendant shall annually pay to the Plaintiff KRW 30,081,917 from October 20, 2014 to September 17, 2015.

Reasons

1. On May 11, 2009, the Defendant entered into a performance guarantee insurance contract for the provision of security by preparing an additional agreement with the Plaintiff when he received a loan from the Young-dong Agricultural Cooperative.

The performance guarantee insurance contract (Additional Agreement) provides that the plaintiff shall pay the insurance proceeds by subrogation to the Young-dong Agricultural Cooperative, and the defendant shall pay the amount of the insurance proceeds by subrogation and the damages for delay calculated by applying the overdue interest rate set by the plaintiff to the date of full payment from the day following the date of full payment.

(Article 2(2). The overdue interest rate determined by the Plaintiff is 6% per annum from the day following the payment of insurance proceeds to 30 days, 9% per annum from the following day to 60 days, and 15% per annum from the following day.

On July 21, 2014, the Defendant did not repay loans to the Young-dong Agricultural Cooperative, a loan holder, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 29,500,000 as insurance money to the above union.

The damages for delay for this is 145,479 won up to August 20, 2014, which is 30 days from July 22, 2014 to August 20, 2014 (=29.5 million won ¡¿ 30/365 ¡¿ 0.06), and 436,438 won up to October 19, 2014, which falls under 60 days from August 21, 2014 to 60 days (=29.5 million won x 60/365 x 0.09).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition as the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay the above insurance money and damages for delay to the plaintiff.

B. The defendant's assertion 1 argues that the defendant's additional agreement is null and void because it is a blank agreement with only the plaintiff's signature and seal which is the debtor in the situation where the loan date and loan financial institution are omitted, and that the agreement and agreement on insurance concluded between the Young-dong Agricultural Cooperative and the plaintiff should be submitted.

According to the statement in Gap evidence No. 3, among additional agreements, the fact that the loan column and the loan financial institution column remain in public space can be recognized.

arrow