beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant A and B jointly and severally share KRW 96,406,247 and KRW 40,91,878 among them, from June 2, 2014.
Reasons
1. Determination of the claim against the defendant A and B
(a) Indication of claims: To be as shown in the reasons for the claims;
(b) Judgment on deemed confession (Article 208 (3) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act);
2. In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings, the facts as stated in the grounds for the claim in the separate sheet, and the facts as stated in the grounds for the change in the separate sheet, are acknowledged in the judgment of the claim against Defendant (Appointed Party) D, Selection E, and G, as stated in the separate sheet Nos. 1 to 3, 1, 2, and 2
According to the above facts, the Plaintiff is jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 26,626,026 and the amount of KRW 9,428,571 in proportion to 17% per annum from June 2, 2014 to the date of full payment, the Defendant (Appointed Party) D, the Selected Party G is jointly and severally liable with the Defendant A to pay the amount of KRW 17,750,684 and the amount of KRW 6,285,714 in proportion to the amount of KRW 17% per annum from June 2, 2014 to the date of full payment.
3. In full view of the facts stated in Gap's evidence Nos. 1 to 3 (including additional numbers) and the whole purport of the pleadings against defendant C, it is recognized as the same facts as stated in the reasons for the claim in the annexed sheet.
Defendant C raises a defense that the Plaintiff’s claim became extinct due to the completion of prescription.
According to the above evidence, it is evident that the Jinjin Korea Credit Union loaned money to Defendant A on September 9, 199, the joint and several surety by Defendant C, and the expiration date of the above loan was September 9, 2001. The lawsuit in this case was filed on June 13, 201 after 10 years from September 9, 2001.
Therefore, the defendant C's defense is justified because the plaintiff's claim of this case became extinct due to the completion of prescription.
4. The Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant A, B, Defendant (Appointed Party) D, Appointor E, and G is justified. The claim against Defendant C is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.