beta
(영문) 광주지방법원순천지원 2020.09.16 2020가단1657

구상금

Text

The instant lawsuit is dismissed.

Costs of lawsuit shall be borne individually by each person.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The payment order C organization against the Defendant of the C organization (hereinafter “C”) applied against the Defendant for a payment order seeking reimbursement under this Court No. 2006 tea3254.

On July 27, 2006, this court accepted C’s request for payment order and ordered C to pay “The Defendant shall pay 49,399,964 won to C and 47,418,286 won out of this money, from July 21, 2006 to the date of service of the present order, 15% per annum from the day following the date of service of the order to the date of full payment.”

Payment order was finalized on November 4, 2006.

(hereinafter “instant claim”). C, on September 5, 2016, filed an application for a payment order with this Court No. 2016 tea1801 for the interruption of extinctive prescription of the instant claim, on the grounds that the original copy of the payment order was served on the Defendant on February 16, 2017 by public notice and became final and conclusive.

B. On December 13, 2019, the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor acquired the instant claim from C.

C. On February 19, 2020, the defendant's objection to the completion of the order of payment and the plaintiff's successor's participation in the plaintiff's succeeding intervenor filed an objection to the above order of payment, and the above demand case was implemented as the litigation procedure of this case.

The Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor succeeded to the instant lawsuit by C on April 29, 2020.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1 to 5 evidence, Eul 1 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings 14Na42553

2. If a copy of a complaint, an original copy, etc. of judgment regarding the legitimacy of an objection against the payment order, was served by service by public notice, barring special circumstances, the defendant was not aware of the service of the judgment without negligence, and in such a case, the defendant is unable to comply with the peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to him/her and thus, he/she may file an appeal to supplement within two weeks after such cause ceases to exist.

Here, "after the cause has ceased to exist" means the parties or parties.