beta
Text
1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 180,000,00 and 5% per annum from September 1, 2017 to January 16, 2019.
Reasons
1. Facts recognized;
A. On November 14, 2016, the Plaintiff: (a) lent KRW 200,000,000 to Defendant B at interest rate of KRW 2.5% per annum; and (b) on April 30, 2017.
Defendant C guaranteed the above loan obligations.
B. On the same day, in order to secure the repayment of the above loan to the Plaintiff, Defendant B completed the registration of creation of a new mortgage with regard to the real estate E located in the city of Category D and the F real estate located in the city of Category B owned by Defendant B with respect to the Plaintiff, the debtor, Defendant B, and the maximum debt amount at KRW 260,000.
[Based on the recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence 1 and 3 (the document establishing a loan and mortgage, and the document signing a mortgage, due to the lack of dispute over the part of the defendant Eul's seal impressions, the authenticity of the entire document is presumed to have been established. Defendant B has a defense to the effect that the part recorded in the debtor's column for the loan certificate and mortgage signing a contract was forged by Eul and the defendant C, but there is no evidence to prove that it is difficult to believe that the document mentioned in Eul's evidence Nos. 2 and 3 was recorded and there is no other evidence to prove that it is consistent with this) 4-
2. According to the facts found in the judgment on the claim, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 20,000,000 calculated by deducting the amount of KRW 20,000,000 that the Plaintiff was paid as principal on July 5, 2017 from the amount of KRW 180,000,000, and the damages for delay calculated at each rate of KRW 15% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act from September 1, 2017 until January 16, 2019, which is the date of this judgment where it is recognized that it is reasonable for the Defendants to object to the scope of the obligations of performance after the due date to the Plaintiff’s claim.
The plaintiff's claim is reasonable within the extent of the above recognition.
3. Some of the Plaintiff’s claims are accepted.