logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.09.09 2015가단5347051
구상금 및 손해배상(기) 등
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. As to KRW 51,912,320 and KRW 51,891,890 among them, Defendant A shall have from June 2, 2015 to August 31, 2015.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. (1) On April 25, 2014, Defendant A entered into a housing finance credit guarantee agreement (hereinafter “instant credit guarantee agreement”) with the Non-Party Han Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Non-Party Bank”), which was entrusted by the Plaintiff with the business of a housing finance credit guarantee (hereinafter “Non-Party Bank”) as of April 25, 2016, under which the amount guaranteed is KRW 50,400,000, and as of April 25, 2016.

(2) On April 25, 2014, Defendant A obtained a loan of KRW 56,00,000 from a non-party bank as security for a housing finance credit guarantee issued by the Plaintiff pursuant to the instant credit guarantee agreement (hereinafter “instant loan”).

Defendant A failed to pay the principal and interest of this case. On June 2, 2015, according to the credit guarantee agreement of this case, the Plaintiff subrogated to Nonparty A bank for the principal amounting to KRW 50,400,00, interest amounting to KRW 1,548,450, total amounting to KRW 51,891,890.

The rate of delayed damage determined by the Plaintiff based on the governing law, etc. is 12% per annum until August 31, 2015, and 8% per annum from the following day.

The additional guarantee fee that Defendant A did not pay is KRW 20,430.

B. Around April 2014, Defendant A prepared a false lease agreement of KRW 80,000,000 with respect to the D building 102 (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) owned by Defendant B, which is the object of the lease, and then delivered the above lease agreement and the employment-related documents issued in the name of the Defendant A to Nonparty bank, and received the instant credit guarantee agreement from Nonparty A as security, while Defendant A obtained the instant loan from Nonparty bank as security.

(2) However, Defendant B, as a false lessor, conspiredd with Defendant C, Plaintiff E, the tenant recruitment book, and Plaintiff B, together with loan brokers, by creating false documents related to employment and false housing lease contract, etc., in order to divide and divide the lease fund.

(3) above.

arrow