집행문부여의 소
D The Seoul Western District Court Decision 2016Hu77488 decided the order of payment in the case of transfer money between the limited company and the defendant.
In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, it is recognized that the reasons for the claim are stated in attached
Therefore, the Plaintiff is a successor to the claim based on the original copy of the payment order in the instant case No. 2016 tea7488. Therefore, the lower court, etc. is obligated to grant the execution clause to the Plaintiff, who is the successor to the non-party D limited liability company, to have the Plaintiff enforce compulsory execution against the Defendant based on the above judgment.
In regard to this, the Defendant asserts to the effect that the Defendant’s obligation had already been extinguished due to the completion of prescription, but the subject of examination in a lawsuit for granting the succeeding execution clause is limited only to the fulfillment of conditions or the existence of succession, and it is not permissible to simply assert the grounds for objection regarding a claim in a lawsuit for granting the succeeding execution clause without filing a lawsuit for objection against the claim.
Therefore, the defendant's above assertion does not interfere with the recognition of the claim of this case.
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.