약정금
1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 29.5 million to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and against this, from June 3, 2014 to January 19, 2015.
A principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall also be deemed a principal lawsuit and counterclaim.
1. Determination as to the cause of the principal claim
A. On January 4, 2013, when the Defendant, who was in a marital relationship with the formation of the agreement, agreed to divorce, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 80 million on the following grounds: “The Defendant, out of the above money, paid KRW 33 million on February 7, 2013, and KRW 17 million by the end of February 2013, and agreed to consult on the remaining 30 million (excluding KRW 500,000)” (hereinafter referred to as the “instant agreement”), may not be disputed between the parties, or may be recognized by the statement in the evidence No. 1. A.
B. We examine whether the above balance under the instant agreement has arrived at the time of performance.
If the time for payment of the money is agreed upon as stated in the above agreement, the agreement that the defendant shall pay the plaintiff the above agreed amount of KRW 80 million has already been concluded, but the agreement shall be deemed an indefinite-term agreement with the meaning that the payment of the remaining amount of KRW 29.5 million shall be determined at the time of the conclusion of the agreement.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Da41766 Decided March 29, 2002). As above, the period during which a claim with an indefinite term is due shall be deemed to have arrived when not only the occurrence of an uncertain event but also the occurrence of a fact becomes impossible.
The Plaintiff filed an application for payment order seeking the remainder on March 19, 2014, as the Plaintiff did not receive the remainder of the agreement for at least one year after the conclusion of the agreement in this case. The Defendant clearly expressed his/her intent not to pay the remainder as he/she did not have the obligation to pay the remainder upon raising an objection as of June 2, 2014.
According to this, an agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant on the time of payment was not concluded until a considerable period has elapsed from the date of the agreement of this case, and at least the defendant's payment order was made.