beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s payment order against the Plaintiff was issued on March 16, 2015 by the Seoul Central District Court (2015 tea 10239).
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. B, on October 24, 2003, borrowed 45 million won at the interest rate of 14.5% per annum and 25% per annum from the New Savings Bank (hereinafter “New Savings Bank”).
The Plaintiff agreed to bear the joint and several debt within the scope of 58.5 million won for the above loan debt of B.
(hereinafter referred to as “joint and several liability obligations of this case”). (b)
The Plaintiff was granted immunity on February 20, 2012 (hereinafter “instant immunity”) upon filing bankruptcy and application for immunity with the Cheongju District Court 201Hau303, 201 and 303, and the said immunity became final and conclusive on March 6, 2012.
However, in the list of creditors of the above case, the Plaintiff omitted the joint and several debt obligations of the new Savings Bank.
C. The New Savings Bank was declared bankrupt on October 29, 2013 by Seoul Central District Court 2013Hahap161, and the Defendant was appointed as a trustee in bankruptcy.
The Defendant filed an application against the Plaintiff for the payment order seeking the payment of the joint and several surety debt amount in the instant case as Seoul Central District Court 2015 tea10239.
As of February 10, 2015, the above court issued a payment order for KRW 58,352,550 (i.e., KRW 13,189,54, KRW 45,162,96) on March 16, 2015, on the ground that B’s debt remains (i.e., balance of KRW 13,189,554, KRW 45,166). “The Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant for delay calculated at the rate of KRW 58,352,550 and KRW 13,189,554 per annum from February 10, 2015 to the date of full payment, but the payment order was finalized at that time.”
[Ground] Evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. The plaintiff asserted that the decision of immunity of this case also extends to the joint and several liability of this case, since he did not know that he was liable for joint and several liability to the new Savings Bank and did not enter it in the creditor list. Accordingly, the defendant asserts that the decision of immunity of this case extends to the joint and several liability of this case.