(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.10.05 2016가단5004832

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.10.05 2016가단5004832

추심금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts (i) On November 24, 2014, based on the final and conclusive judgment on the claim for reimbursement claim of the Seoul Central District Court 2015da5004873 (hereinafter “instant judgment”) with respect to the non-party corporation and the third obligor, the Plaintiff was served on the Defendant on the non-party corporation and the third obligor on the basis of the instant judgment (hereinafter “instant judgment”). The “Aon-the-job design, production, and installation service contract,” which the obligor has against the third obligor, “a claim for the construction cost from the third obligor under the above payment method, with the exception of the claim for the prohibition of seizure against wages, until the claim amounting to KRW 69,150,380 (hereinafter “the claim”). On November 25, 2014, the Defendant was served on the Defendant on the provisional attachment order (Cheongju District Court 2014Kadan3420).

[Attachment] 2,24,572 won (i.e., interest at the rate of five percent per annum from July 24, 2014 to March 31, 2015) of the instant judgment against the Defendant of the non-party company: (a) the Plaintiff obtained a provisional attachment of KRW 355,30,00 from the Cheongju District Court on October 14, 2015 (interest at the rate of 20% per annum from April 1, 2015 to October 12, 2015) (i.e., interest at the rate of 20%) 2,224,572 won (i., interest at the rate of 20% per annum from April 1, 2015 to October 12, 2015 on the principal) and the provisional attachment of KRW 355,300 from the instant judgment against the Defendant; and (ii) the Defendant received a collection order from the Defendant on December 15, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 8, purport of whole pleading

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay the above KRW 24,115,436 according to the collection order of this case and its delay damages to the plaintiff, except in extenuating circumstances.

B. As to this, the defendant asserts that the non-party company cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim, since all of the construction cost was paid to the non-party company before receiving the collection order of this case.

Therefore, the following is the Dominant.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.09.08 2015가단147669

-대구지방법원 2020.07.17 2018가단25271

-광주지방법원목포지원 2016.09.07 2016가단1470

-수원지방법원성남지원 2020.01.15 2019가단9698