beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The parties' assertion
A. On July 24, 2006, the summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) on July 24, 2006, Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant B”) loaned KRW 7.5 billion to Defendant B (hereinafter “Defendant B”); (b) on July 24, 2007, at the rate of 10% per annum; and (c) at the rate of overdue interest rate of 25% per annum (hereinafter “instant loan”); and (d) on December 28, 2010, Defendant B extended a loan by setting the repayment date of KRW 1.47 billion per annum on December 28, 201, at the rate of 10% per annum, and at the rate of 25% per annum (hereinafter “instant loan”). Defendant C jointly and severally guaranteed the instant loan obligations.
Afterward, the Defendants lost the benefit of time, and as of January 12, 2016, the principal and interest of the instant loan KRW 11,244,613,167 (i.e., KRW 7., KRW 2,716,18,514 calculated as the interest on the loan principal (i.e., KRW 1,028,424,653), and the principal and interest of the instant loan KRW 3,100,131,959 (i.e., KRW 1,477,209,938,497, and KRW 420,193,462).
Accordingly, the Plaintiff, as a part of the claim against the Defendants, seek payment of KRW 897,00,000 and damages for delay.
B. The summary of the Defendants’ assertion is that Defendant B did not enter into a credit transaction agreement or received money with Defendant B regarding the instant loans Nos. 1 and 2, and all of the loan-related documents, such as a credit transaction agreement and an application for extension of credit extension, etc., on the grounds that the Plaintiff had loans Nos. 1 and 2 of this case, are merely forged documents prepared at will by obtaining the signature of Defendant C, the representative director of Defendant B, and using the blank loan documents.
2. If the seal imprinted by the signature affixed to the document of judgment is affixed to the signature affixed to the signature, barring any special circumstance, it shall be presumed that the authenticity of the seal imprint was created, that is, the act of affixing the seal is based on the will of the signature holder, and once the authenticity of the seal imprint is presumed to have been established.