부당이득금
1. The Defendant’s payment of KRW 415,298,629 to the Plaintiff is 5% per annum from May 30, 2012 to May 25, 2018.
1. On October 11, 2011, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking damages by the Seoul Central District Court 201Gahap2758 (hereinafter “relevant first instance judgment”), and was sentenced to a provisional execution judgment stating that “the Defendant (the Plaintiff of this case) shall pay to the Plaintiff (the Defendant of this case) 392,879,548 won with 5% per annum from August 13, 2010 to January 27, 201, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment.”
Accordingly, according to the judgment of the court of first instance on February 28, 2012, the Defendant issued a seizure and collection order on the part of KRW 485,864,275 among the dividend claims of the Plaintiff’s third debtor in the case as Seoul Central District Court B (Seoul District Court No. 20102, No. 2007).
On May 29, 2012, the Defendant filed a claim for the withdrawal of the deposit money No. 10702 with the said Suwon District Court on the basis of the order of seizure and collection on May 29, 2012, and received KRW 415,29,629.
However, as a result of the Plaintiff’s appeal as Seoul High Court 201Na9759 against the relevant judgment of the first instance court, the said appellate court rendered a judgment on September 25, 2013 that “the judgment of the first instance is revoked. The Plaintiff (the Defendant)’s claim is dismissed,” and the said judgment of the appellate court became final and conclusive around that time.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 4, Gap 5-1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The effect of enforcement based on the judgment of the provisional execution ordering the judgment on the cause of the claim is not final and conclusive, but on the condition of cancellation or change of the judgment on the merits or the declaration of provisional execution at the later appellate court.
In other words, Supreme Court Decision 201Da25145 Decided August 25, 201, which became final and conclusive that if a part or all of the judgment on the merits becomes invalid by the declaration of provisional execution, it cannot be executed by the previous judgment on the provisional execution.