양수금
1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part of the claim amounting to KRW 212,900 is dismissed.
2. The plaintiff, Ga.
1. The description of the grounds for the claim shall be as specified in the attached Form;
(2) Article 208(3)3 of the Civil Procedure Act (amended by Public Notice) shall apply mutatis mutandis to the following cases: (a) a creditor shall be deemed to be a “Plaintiff” and “debtor” shall be deemed to be a “Defendant.”
3. The part dismissing part of the Plaintiff sought payment of KRW 212,90,00 for the demand procedure expenses incurred by the Plaintiff in the previous payment order procedure (Seoul District Court Decision 2016Da19693) filed against the Defendants.
However, the cost of demanding procedure corresponds to the cost of lawsuit, which can be reimbursed after the final judgment became final and conclusive, so there is no benefit to seek a separate lawsuit.
(See Supreme Court Decision 9Da68577 delivered on May 12, 2000, etc.). Therefore, the part concerning the claim for the cost of demand procedure in the instant lawsuit is unlawful.