채무금 청구의 소
1. The defendant shall calculate the plaintiff 10,000,000 won with a rate of 20% per annum from November 1, 2004 to the day of full payment.
1. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant and the non-party C seeking payment of KRW 23,81,00 as Seoul Central District Court Decision 2003Da436595, which was 23,81,000, and the plaintiff and the defendant agreed on June 28, 2004 when the lawsuit is pending, and the lawsuit is terminated, and the defendant still fails to pay the money specified in the following mediation clause to the plaintiff. The fact that the defendant does not dispute between the parties, or that the defendant does not yet pay the money specified in the following mediation clause to the plaintiff is acknowledged according to the statement in the evidence No. 1 through No. 3.
Conciliation Provisions
1. The defendant shall pay 10,000,000 won to the plaintiff by October 31, 2004.
However, if the above money is not paid by the above payment date, the unpaid amount shall be paid in addition to the interest rate of 20% per annum from the day following the payment date to the day of full payment.
2. Where it is found that a transfer contract between the Plaintiff and Nonparty D on monetary claims of KRW 23,811,000 against the Defendant on August 21, 2003 between the Plaintiff and Nonparty D was void due to the failure, invalidation, revocation, or rescission of the transfer contract, the Plaintiff shall refund all the money received from the Defendant to the Defendant.
3. The plaintiff waives the remaining claims against the defendant.
4. The costs of lawsuit and the costs of mediation shall be borne by each person;
2. Determination
A. As seen earlier, the Plaintiff filed a claim as stipulated in Paragraph (1) of the above conciliation provision against the Defendant for the purpose of the extension of prescription due to the expiration of the statute of limitations for the claim established by the instant conciliation, and thus, the Defendant did not pay to the Plaintiff any money set forth in the instant conciliation. As such, it is evident in the record that the completion date of the statute of limitations for the claim established by the instant conciliation was imminent, barring any special circumstance, at the time of the filing of the lawsuit (as of June 17, 2014).