beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.06.08 2016가단22407

약정금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

Basic Facts

A. On November 26, 1998, the Defendant Cooperative obtained a disposition to authorize the establishment of a tourist facility under Article 16 of the former Land Readjustment Projects Act (repealed by Act No. 6252, Jan. 28, 200; hereinafter “Act”) and received a disposition to authorize the establishment of a tourist facility under Article 9 of the Act on December 24, 1999.

B. On April 13, 2006, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant Partnership, etc. as Daejeon District Court 2006Gahap313, and decided on April 13, 2006 that “the Defendant Union shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 150 million with interest of KRW 150 million and 20% per annum from April 14, 2006 to the day of full payment.” The above decision became final and conclusive on May 5, 2006.

(hereinafter referred to as the “final judgment related to the instant case”) C.

On March 4, 2015, the Plaintiff applied for a compulsory auction of movable property (hereinafter “instant compulsory auction”) against the Defendant Union by the Daejeon District Court’s official branch office 2015No57 (hereinafter “instant compulsory auction”). Accordingly, on June 2, 2015, the property of the Defendant Union was seized on June 2, 2015, and the date of sale was set on February 22, 2016 as a result of a failed bid.

On February 18, 2016, the representative C of the Defendant Union prepared a “written resolution on performance of obligations” (hereinafter referred to as the “written resolution on performance of obligations”) with the purport that the Plaintiff shall additionally pay KRW 50 million in return for the postponement of the date of auction of the auction procedure of the instant compulsory auction, etc., until the time, the principal and interest of obligations pursuant to the relevant final judgment of the instant case shall be calculated as KRW 450 million.

E. On February 19, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application with the competent enforcement officer for the postponement of the sale date of the instant compulsory auction procedure. Accordingly, the sale date was changed on March 21, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's statements in Gap's 1 through 4, 19, 25 (including branch numbers, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings.