청구이의
1. Compulsory execution based on the judgment in the loan case No. 2016Gadan8943 against the defendant against the plaintiff is 20.0.
1. According to the purport of the evidence No. 4-1 and the entire pleadings, in the case of loans against the Plaintiff, Busan District Court 2016Kadan8943, which the Defendant filed against the Plaintiff, the above court rendered a non-litigation on April 26, 2016, stating that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant the amount of KRW 47 million and the amount calculated at the rate of KRW 15% per annum from February 28, 2016 to the date of complete payment” (hereinafter “instant judgment”), and the above judgment can be acknowledged as the facts finalized on May 19, 2016.
2. The judgment of this case was rendered on the ground that, around the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Defendant and the Defendant received part of living expenses, apartment purchase fund, and vehicle purchase cost, etc. on the basis of the loan certificate of KRW 47 million, which was formally prepared by the Plaintiff, the Defendant filed a lawsuit claiming a loan with the Busan District Court 2016Kadan8943 and filed a lawsuit claiming a loan with the Busan District Court 2016Kadan8943, on the basis of the loan certificate of KRW 47 million, which became final and conclusive after the judgment of this case.
The judgment of this case is considerably different from the facts of the cause of the claim regarding the date, amount, etc. of payment, and it is not a loan but a gift, and its execution due to the defendant's litigation fraud, so it is not allowed as an abuse of rights
Preliminaryly, even if the amount of domestic judgment is recognized, the Plaintiff paid to the Defendant the amount equivalent to KRW 7 million by delivering the vehicle on or around July 22, 2016. Since the Plaintiff paid KRW 3 million on August 11, 2016, KRW 13 million on August 12, 2016, KRW 11,141,930 on August 31, 2016 and repaid the total amount of KRW 34,141,930 on August 31, 2016, enforcement exceeding KRW 12,858,070 on the remaining amount of the debt is unjust.
3. Determination
A. Even if a right is based on a final and conclusive judgment on the primary assertion, it should be exercised in good faith and in a case where enforcement based on the judgment becomes an abuse of rights, the executory obligor is dissatisfied with the claim.