청구이의 등
The judgment of the first instance, including the principal lawsuit and counterclaim, shall be modified as follows:
1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) of the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff.
1. Of the Plaintiff’s principal claim, the first instance court accepted the part of the Defendant’s motion for compulsory execution based on the No. 761 of the 2008 Deed No. 761 dated Dec. 29, 2008 by a notary public against the Plaintiff A, among the Plaintiff’s principal claim of the Plaintiff’s principal claim, which rejected compulsory execution based on the No. 761 of the 2008 Book No. 761, Dec. 29,
2. The following facts may be acknowledged by taking account of the whole purport of the pleadings in each description of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, and Eul evidence Nos. 3-1 and 2 (the fact signed by the plaintiff B is not a dispute between the parties, and each authenticity is recognized).
The Defendant lent the money to the Plaintiff from March 20, 206, and paid the money promised by the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff. On November 29, 2009, the Defendant filed an application against the Plaintiff for the issuance of a claim seizure and collection order against the Plaintiff’s deposit claims against the Non-Party Korean Bank Co., Ltd., and seven banks, as 2009. The above court issued a claim seizure and collection order on November 27, 2009.
On the other hand, on December 29, 2009, the defendant submitted a written waiver of collection to the above court. On January 21, 2010, the above court notified the third debtor bank of the above attachment and collection order cancellation.
B. On January 6, 2010, the Defendant terminated all the debt relations between the Plaintiff and the Parties on the condition that they withdraw compulsory execution, but the Plaintiff agreed to pay the following (1) through (4) amount to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant performance agreement”; (3) a written statement of performance, which is part of the evidence No. 3, stating the instant performance agreement, was issued by the Plaintiff at the face value of 68,940,000 won as the collateral value of the instant performance agreement; and (4) a notary public on January 12, 2010, issued a promissory note of KRW 68,940,000 as the collateral value of the instant performance agreement.