beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.10.25 2017가단26733

청구이의

Text

1. The Defendant’s judgment against the Plaintiff is based on an executory exemplification of the protocol of mediation with the Suwon District Court 2016Kadan512862.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 23, 2016, the conciliation as follows was concluded in other claims filed by the Defendant against the Plaintiff (money).

(U) A protocol prepared pursuant to the instant conciliation (hereinafter “instant conciliation protocol”). The Plaintiff shall be paid KRW 96 million to the Defendant on June 30, 2016; the KRW 10 million shall be paid until June 30, 2016; and the remaining KRW 6 million shall be paid until June 30, 2017; and each installment shall be paid until December 31, 2018. If the Plaintiff fails to pay the relevant amount on one occasion at each of the payment dates, the Plaintiff shall immediately lose the profit of installment repayment; and the unpaid amount shall be paid in addition to the annual damages for delay from the day following the date of loss of profit to the date of full payment.

B. The Plaintiff paid KRW 80 million to the Defendant before the instant protocol of mediation was prepared.

C. The Plaintiff did not pay the remainder of KRW 16 million, and the Defendant applied for a compulsory auction for forest land owned by the Plaintiff with a claim for the payment of KRW 16 million and damages for delay at the rate of KRW 10% per annum from July 1, 2017 to the date of full payment. On July 19, 2017, a compulsory auction for the said real estate was commenced.

(Ground for recognition), Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2-1, 3-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings, as a whole, without dispute.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion paid KRW 80 million to E, the mother of the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and the Plaintiff acquired 10,000 square meters and multi-family multi-family housing owned by the Plaintiff and the Defendant, by means of a consultation and division. The Plaintiff was paid KRW 16,00,000 from E on July 3, 2016, when the Plaintiff agreed to take over the lease deposit repayment obligations owed by E, while the Plaintiff resided in the above housing and leased part of the housing to four households.