beta
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2015.11.25 2015가단20039

약정금

Text

1. The defendant shall pay 30,000,000 won to the plaintiff and 20% per annum from January 1, 2010 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and C are legally married couple, and the Defendant is a person who has been born between C and D before her marriage with the Plaintiff.

B. From around 2005, the Defendant found C as a hospital operated by C and demanded C and the Plaintiff to pay money.

C. On December 10, 2007, the Plaintiff drafted a written agreement with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant agreement”) with the following content, and was present at a notarial office along with the Defendant to obtain authentication for a deed signed by a private person, and paid KRW 30 million to the Defendant.

Secretary of the United States of America

1. The plaintiff shall pay the defendant the last 30 million won.

2. After receiving the above amount from the Plaintiff, the Defendant did not contact or find out any contact with the Plaintiff or his spouse.

3. If the defendant contact or found the plaintiff's spouse, thereby causing mental or material pain to the plaintiff, the defendant shall promptly return the above 30 million won and the above 20% interest per annum from the day following the day when he received the above amount to the plaintiff.

4. In addition to the above amount, the defendant does not have any property claim against the plaintiff or his spouse in the future.

From the end of 2009, the defendant found C as a hospital where C had regularly worked, and even though C refused to hold an interview, it remains in the large hospital room for a long time, and entered the hospital room without permission despite the removal of the hospital employees.

E. On June 13, 2012, the Defendant filed a suit seeking recognition against C by the Seoul Family Court 201ddan71769, and was sentenced to a quoted judgment on June 13, 2012.

F. After that, the Defendant demanded C and the Plaintiff to pay additional money in addition to the legal costs of the above stamp claim case, and it is doubtful whether the Plaintiff’s children from October 2014 to the Plaintiff become aware of this fact.