beta
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2018.07.26 2018가단2401

청구이의

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff purchased a heavy vehicle on November 4, 2004, and entered into an installment financing agreement to obtain a loan of KRW 4,000,000 on the security of the vehicle from Daewoo Capital Co., Ltd. (hereinafter the trade name was changed to Aap Capital Co., Ltd.). While paying the above loan, the Plaintiff sold the vehicle to B on April 28, 2006.

on January 20, 2006, Daewoo Capital Co., Ltd. applied for a payment order for the payment order for the payment of unpaid installments against the plaintiff on March 3, 2006 (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2006 tea5809). The above payment order decision reached the plaintiff on March 15, 2006 and became final and conclusive on March 30, 2006.

On July 1, 2009, Aju Capital Co., Ltd. transferred the claims of KRW 1,548,553 and interest KRW 1,427,513 to the Plaintiff and sent a notice of assignment of claims to the Plaintiff on January 6, 2014.

On May 9, 2014, the Defendant applied for a payment order against the Plaintiff and received the payment order on May 12, 2014 (Seoul Eastern District Court 2014Hu20618), and the payment order decision reached the Plaintiff on June 3, 2014, and became final and conclusive on June 18, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 5, Eul evidence 1 to 4-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserted that the defendant's claim should be rejected due to the omission of the defendant's claim in the course of debt adjustment by filing an application for credit recovery support with the Credit Counseling and Recovery Commission. However, the circumstances alleged by the plaintiff are not only grounds for refusing compulsory execution, but also grounds for refusing compulsory execution are not other grounds for refusing compulsory execution, and there is no assertion or proof as to this.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion cannot be accepted.

3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.