beta
Text
Defendant B shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 100,000,000 as well as 12% per annum from October 16, 2009 to the day of full payment.
Reasons
1. Claim against the defendant B
(a) Indication of claim: A claim for the extension of extinctive prescription of claim based on a judgment of the Daegu District Court 2009Kadan50718 against the plaintiff B
(b) Judgment made by deemed confession (Article 208 (3) 2 and Article 150 (1) of the Civil Procedure Act);
2. Claim against Defendant C
A. On November 5, 1999, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 100,000,00 to Defendant B, and the joint and several surety by Defendant C. As the Defendants failed to repay the above money, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendants under the Daegu District Court Decision 2009Da50718, Nov. 6, 2009 with the judgment that “the Defendant jointly and severally pays to the Plaintiff the amount calculated at a rate of 20% per annum from October 16, 2009 to the day of full payment,” and the facts finalized on November 24, 2009 are either disputed between the parties, or plus the purport of the entire pleadings as set forth in subparagraph 1 and subparagraph 1-1-1.
According to the above facts of recognition, Defendant C is jointly and severally liable to pay KRW 100,000,000 and damages for delay with Defendant B, except in extenuating circumstances.
B. Defendant C asserts that the Plaintiff’s claim for the judgment amount has expired by prescription.
According to the above evidence, the above judgment is acknowledged to have arrived at November 24, 2009 by means of service by public notice to Defendant C, and it is clear in the record that the plaintiff filed the lawsuit in this case on June 8, 2020 after the lapse of 10 years from that time, and there is no dispute between the parties that the plaintiff did not discontinue the statute of limitations between them.
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant C was extinguished by prescription, and the defendant's defense pointing this out is with merit.
C. Since the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant C was extinguished, the Plaintiff’s claim cannot be accepted.
3. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant B is justified and the claim against the defendant C is justified.