건물인도
1. All appeals filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the principal lawsuit and counterclaim are dismissed.
2. The appeal costs.
1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for a supplementary judgment, and thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Parts used or added;
A. Of the part of the judgment of the first instance, the part of the first instance, which was used, ① “the instant loan obligation” as “the instant loan obligation,” and ② as of December 13, 2016, “the instant loan obligation remains 22,089,000 won” (as indicated in the table of appropriation of obligation, as seen in the attached Table of appropriation of obligation, and as of December 2016, the instant loan obligation remains 22,089,000)” are deemed to be discontinued [ even if the extinctive prescription of the principal obligation is completed separately from the principal obligation, although the extinctive prescription of the principal obligation has not been completed but with respect to the principal obligation, it is presumed that the obligor, while the extinctive prescription of the principal obligation was not completed, was impliedly approved as to the principal obligation, as long as there is no dispute as to the amount partially repaid by the obligor while the extinctive prescription has been completed, and thus, it is presumed that the Defendant’s interest obligation has ceased to be paid with interest].”
B. The following shall be added to the portion added to the judgment of the court of first instance, that is, No. 7 of the 10th sentence.
[Immediate, even if a claim with executory power due to the confirmation of a payment order is extinguished due to a cause, such as a performance of snow, etc., it does not automatically lose its executory power unless it is excluded by a lawsuit seeking objection against a claim (see Supreme Court Decision 70Ma546, Sept. 29, 1970). The plaintiff did not raise an objection to the claim against the payment order of this case until the notice of attribution is given to the plaintiff.