(a) The scope of guarantee liability of a joint and several guarantor of credit cards which determines the monthly limit on use;

(b) Methods for calculating the scope of responsibility of joint and several sureties where credit transactions have been accumulated;

(a) In concluding a credit card use contract, if the credit card company set the monthly credit card use limit of the member's member, unless otherwise specifically set forth in the scope of guarantee liability, the credit card company will guarantee the performance of the payment obligation within the monthly credit transaction limit of the guarantor, i.e., the monthly credit card use limit of the member.

(b) Where a monthly outdoor transaction by the use of credit cards exceeds the maximum amount, the liability of the joint and several sureties of the credit card shall be reduced to the maximum amount, and where the credit transaction with the above credit card has been accumulated over several months, the scope of the liability of the guarantor shall be determined on the basis of the monthly transaction amount.

Article 429 of the Civil Act

A. Supreme Court Decision 85Meu1626 Decided January 28, 1986

Attorney Lee Jong-chul et al., Counsel for the defendant

Defendant

Seoul High Court Decision 86Na2717 delivered on December 19, 1986

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

We examine the Defendant’s grounds of appeal.

As to ground of appeal No. 1:

In the case of this case, if a credit card joint and several surety determines the monthly credit card use limit of the member's member as to the scope of its guarantee liability, it shall be viewed as guaranteeing the member's performance of the payment obligation within the limit of the monthly credit transaction limit of the member's monthly credit card, i.e., the member's monthly credit card use limit, unless otherwise specified in the scope of its guarantee liability (see Supreme Court Decision 85Meu1626, Jan. 28, 1986; Supreme Court Decision 84Meu1587, Feb. 25, 1986). This means that if the member's member's credit card use card exceeds its limit, the member's liability shall be reduced within the limit of the guarantor's liability. Thus, if the credit card use card is accumulated over several months and the credit transaction is conducted, it shall be determined on the basis of the transaction amount per month.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance maintained by the court below, the court below acknowledged the following facts: the defendant agreed to assume joint and several liability for the future debt incurred from the use of the credit card by the non-party company when the non-party company entered the credit card company as a credit card member handled by the non-party company around September 8, 1984; the non-party company has been engaged in the non-party purchase transaction between October 1984 and February 1985; the non-party company was engaged in the above credit card transaction between February 1984 and February 28, 1985; the non-party company did not make a decision on the amount of 3,262,719, and 323,080 won as the monthly credit card member's credit card company's credit card member's credit card member's credit card member's credit card member's credit card member's credit card member's credit card member's credit card member's credit card member's credit card member's credit card member's credit card member's credit card member's credit card member's credit.

In this case, between the above non-party company's credit payment through the whole transaction period of the non-party company as the guarantor, the defendant, who is the guarantor, should be liable for guarantee only within the limit of two million won limited to the monthly use limit. However, this cannot be accepted as a single opinion.

As to ground of appeal No. 2

According to the reasoning of the first instance judgment cited by the court below, the court below acknowledged the defendant's guaranteed liability amount to be reduced to 30 percent again in consideration of the fact that the above non-party company, the guarantor, was in arrears with the credit card issuer, as stated in the judgment of the court below. In light of the records, the court below's above measures are just and acceptable, and the degree of such consideration is no longer reasonable and it is not recognized as illegal. The ground for appeal is without merit.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Man-hee (Presiding Justice)