beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.08.16 2018가단5059980

양수금

Text

1. The defendant shall pay 30,194,327 won to the plaintiff.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3.Paragraph 1.

Reasons

Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, it is recognized that the reasons for the claim was stated in the attached Form, and that the Bankruptcy Trustee of Chuncheon Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation notified the defendant of the assignment of claims on April 14, 2005.

According to this, the defendant is obligated to pay KRW 30,194,327 to the plaintiff.

As to this, the defendant asserts that the claim of this case was extinguished by the completion of extinctive prescription.

The period of extinctive prescription of claims that have become final and conclusive by a judgment shall be ten years, even if it falls under the short-term extinctive prescription, and since the decision on performance recommendation has the same effect as a final and conclusive judgment, the period of extinctive prescription of claims for

However, according to the evidence evidence No. 5, the Plaintiff received a collection order against the Defendant based on the same performance recommendation decision on February 12, 2013, before ten years have passed since the above performance recommendation was issued, and according to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case was difficult from February 12, 2013, which was the time when the above performance recommendation was issued, to suspend the statute of limitations. Accordingly, the Defendant’s above assertion is without merit.

In this regard, the plaintiff asserts that the lawsuit in this case was filed for the interruption of extinctive prescription, so long as there is no need to file a lawsuit for the interruption of extinctive prescription, the benefit of the lawsuit in this case can be

However, since res judicata is not recognized in a decision on performance recommendation, it cannot be deemed that there is no benefit in the lawsuit in this case seeking a judgment that acknowledges res judicata.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.