beta
Text
1. The Defendants jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 48,196,186 and KRW 33,000,000 among them.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On October 18, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a credit transaction agreement with Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) on a set of the lending subject E, credit limit of KRW 300,000,00,000, and the credit period expiration date: October 11, 2013; interest rate of less than three months; interest rate of loans in cases of less than three months; interest rate of at least 8%; and interest rate of loans in cases of more than three months (17%) (17%). Defendant D entered into a limited collateral guarantee agreement with the Plaintiff of the Defendant Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant collateral guarantee agreement”).
B. The Defendant Company lost the benefit of time due to the Defendant Company’s failure to repay the above loan obligation after the expiration of the credit period. As of July 3, 2019, the principal of the above loan obligation is 30,000,000 won, and the interest or interest in arrears remains in total of 48,196,186 won, and the Plaintiff’s compensation rate for delay after April 13, 2018 remains in total of 48,196,186 won.
【Defendant Company based on Recognition】 Defendant Company: The fact that there is no dispute over Defendant D, each entry in the evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including the number of branch offices), and the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments in the judgment of deemed confessions (Article 208(3)2 of the Civil Procedure Act);
2. Determination:
A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendants jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 48,196,186 of the principal and interest of KRW 33,00,000 as well as damages for delay calculated by the agreed interest rate of KRW 13.73% per annum from July 4, 2019 to the date of full payment. Defendant D is liable to pay to the Plaintiff within the limit of KRW 54,00,000, which is the maximum amount of collateral guarantee.
1) Determination as to Defendant D’s assertion 1) Defendant D’s assertion is merely a representative director in the form of the Defendant Company and substantially managed the Defendant Company by F. The Plaintiff was well aware of such circumstances, and thus, the instant contract for collateral security was made by means of a false declaration of agreement between the Plaintiff and Defendant D.