집행판결
1. With respect to the Korean Commercial Arbitration Act No. 1511-0011, which is an incorporated association between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, its intermediate financial resources.
1. On January 5, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a construction contract with the Defendant, which set the construction cost of KRW 4.9 million in relation to the construction work of “Smoking crowdfunding” at the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government fourth floor (hereinafter “instant construction work”). On or around the 9th of the same month, the Plaintiff completed the construction work, but the Defendant paid only KRW 4.2 million in the construction cost and did not pay the remainder of KRW 700,000 in the construction cost.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed an application for arbitration seeking payment of the unpaid construction price with the Korea Commercial Arbitration Board, and on March 31, 2015, the Korea Commercial Arbitration Board rendered an arbitral award as shown in the attached Form (hereinafter “instant arbitral award”) (hereinafter “instant arbitral award”).
[Ground for Recognition: A without dispute, A1, and the purport of the whole pleadings] The enforcement of an arbitral award shall be conducted by a court judgment of execution, and the arbitral award made within the Republic of Korea shall be enforced unless there are grounds for revocation of the arbitral award under Article 36(2) of the Arbitration Act.
(Article 37(1) and Article 38 of the Arbitration Act). Therefore, compulsory execution based on the arbitral award of this case must be permitted.
2. The defendant's assertion argues that the construction of this case can not be paid any balance of construction works without repairing any defects in the walls, the state of the surface of the river, etc., which are replaced and expanded by the construction of entangter, and that compulsory execution based on the arbitral award of this case shall not be permitted not taking into account the defendant's assertion.
However, an objection to an arbitral award may be raised only by filing a lawsuit for setting aside the arbitral award with a court. This does not fall under any of the items of Article 36(2) of the Arbitration Act, even if the Defendant’s assertion is intended to seek setting aside the arbitral award.
Therefore, all of the defendant's arguments are not accepted.
3. All of the plaintiff's claims are accepted.