beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.07.05 2018가단5269404

양수금

Text

1. The Defendants jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 84,704,308 as well as KRW 45,00,000,000 from March 16, 2007.

Reasons

1. According to Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 as to the cause of the claim, Eul Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the defendant C") granted a loan to the defendant Eul Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the defendant Eul"), and the defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the defendant C"), etc. received a claim against the defendants from the non-party bank, and filed a lawsuit against the defendants (hereinafter referred to as "prior action") with the Seoul Central District Court on Oct. 10, 2008, and on Oct. 10, 2008, the above court rendered a judgment that "the defendants jointly and severally agreed with the plaintiff 841,780,669 won and 447,204,289 won with interest of 25% per annum from March 16, 2007 to the day of full payment, and 304,207 won with interest of 205% per annum from 207 to 3084,2007 won.

2. The defendants' assertion and judgment

A. The defendant C asserted that, around February 20, 203, the defendant C would offset the FP loans by selling and selling copyright to the defendant C, and the debt of the defendant C was extinguished. Even if it is not so, the plaintiff's claim (hereinafter "the claim of this case") is extinguished by the extinctive prescription of 5 to 10 years. Thus, the plaintiff's claim cannot be complied with.

Defendant B asserts that the extinctive prescription of the instant claim has expired.

B. 1) Determination 1) Even if a claim established by a judgment on related legal principles falls under the short-term extinctive prescription, the said extinctive prescription shall be ten years (Article 165(1) of the Civil Act); and the prescription interrupted by a judicial claim shall begin to run anew from the time the judgment becomes final and conclusive (Article 178(2) of the Civil Act).