beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 300,000,000 and its related amount are 5% per annum from September 1, 2008 to December 11, 2017 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire argument in Gap evidence No. 1 as to the cause of the claim, it is acknowledged that the plaintiff and the defendant prepared a loan certificate (hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”) with the purport of “one hundred billion won (300,000,000 won) regularly borrowed the above amount and return it until August 2008” among the plaintiff and the defendant.
Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay 300 million won and damages for delay to the plaintiff, unless there are special circumstances to the plaintiff.
2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion
A. As to the assertion that the debtor of the loan certificate of this case is not the defendant, the defendant asserts that the loan obligations against the plaintiff under the loan certificate of this case are not the defendant's obligations but the defendant's obligations.
In principle, if a contract is concluded by a document and the parties to the contract are indicated in such document, it is reasonable to determine the parties to the contract in accordance with the language and text indicated therein. In order to recognize a person not indicated as the parties to the contract as the party to the contract, there should be circumstances to deem that there exists a mutual agreement between the parties not indicated in the contract document and the other party to grant the status as the party to the contract, such as devolving upon the rights and duties under the contract, by comprehensively considering the purpose and content of the contract, and the motive and circumstances leading up to the contract
(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da7861 Decided May 28, 2009). In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement No. 1, the following facts are revealed: (a) the Defendant’s name is written on the loan certificate of this case (Evidence A) and the Defendant’s seal is affixed thereto; (b) while it does not indicate “A” or “B” and does not affix the C’s official seal to the Defendant.