beta
(영문) 울산지방법원 2017.10.17 2016가단15883

청구이의

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On March 20, 2013, the Plaintiff (the name before the opening of the name is C) and the Defendant made up a notarial deed in a debt repayment contract (No. 775 of 2013, No. 775 of 2013, No. 2013, No. 2013, No. 2010) stating that the Plaintiff would have no objection even if the Plaintiff was immediately subject to compulsory execution.

B. On October 27, 2015, the Defendant: (a) received a seizure and collection order from the Ulsan District Court 2015TTB1298, and performed compulsory execution against the Plaintiff’s deposit claim.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserted that while working for the sports drinking club located in Ulsan-gu, the plaintiff and the judgment made the notarial deed in this case by borrowing money from the defendant as the prepaid money. The above prepaid money that the defendant paid to the plaintiff is paid on the premise of commercial sex acts or in violation of good customs and other social order as economic benefits related to commercial sex acts. Thus, the defendant's compulsory execution against the plaintiff should not be allowed.

Therefore, the facts of the Notarial Deed (A) out of the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff are confirmed by the Plaintiff that the Plaintiff bears the obligation of borrowing funds to the Defendant, and the content of the Notarial Deed (A2) is that the Plaintiff works as the head of office at the Defendant’s main point and borrowed money in the name of advance payment. However, it is insufficient to recognize the above Notarial Deed alone as to whether the aforesaid advance payment is related to sexual traffic.

The content of the recording (A3) is insufficient to prove whether the conversation or the criminal defendant related to the prepaid money is still related to sexual traffic.

Therefore, the plaintiff submitted.