beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal and each selective claim added by this court are all dismissed.
2. After an appeal is filed.
Reasons
Basic Facts
The reasoning for this Court’s explanation is as follows: (a) except where “Nos. 4 and 5” in Section 4 of the judgment of the court of first instance is used as “Nos. 1, 4 and 5” in Section 4 of the judgment of the court of first instance; and (b) it is identical to the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, (c) this Court
In light of the following: (a) the Plaintiff, which was the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim, established the instant right to collateral (hereinafter “instant right to collateral”) on the ground that D had the obligation to provide security for down payment KRW 500 million to the Defendant pursuant to Article 7(1) of the instant supply contract; (b) the instant right to collateral is formally prepared to provide documents necessary for the establishment of the right to collateral; and (c) there is no reason for the Plaintiff, a surety, to provide security beyond the scope of the obligation to provide collateral to D, the secured obligation of the instant right to collateral (hereinafter “right to collateral”) is limited to the obligation to supply products (specific obligation) with a down payment amount of KRW
D At least before April 30, 2014, the Defendant entered all the products equivalent to KRW 500 million for the down payment under the instant supply contract, and the secured obligation of the instant right to collateral became extinct as repayment. As such, the Defendant is obligated to cancel the instant right to collateral security on April 30, 2014 to the Plaintiff on the ground of the repayment of finalized claim.
Article 7 (1) of the Supply Contract of this case can be seen as an agreement under which D provides the Defendant with a contract deposit amounting to KRW 500 million.
D At least before April 30, 2014, the Defendant entered all products worth KRW 500 million under the instant supply contract to the Defendant, and the Defendant is obligated to cancel the instant right to collateral security on April 30, 2014 due to the fulfillment of the termination condition.
(Reasons for Selective Claim added at the trial). The Plaintiff, through D, completed the supply to the Defendant, “D” to the Defendant, and thus, ordered the order of the gift product in 2014.5 billion won.