logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.01.23 2015가단49670
추심금
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 9,660,190 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from November 25, 2015 to January 23, 2018.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On July 1, 2005, the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation of Gwangju Mutual Savings and Finance Company filed a loan lawsuit (2005da829) against the non-party C and one other in this court, and the judgment was finalized on August 17, 2005.

"C and D shall jointly and severally pay the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation 441,067,816 won and 226,407,376 won a year from June 25, 199 to July 24, 199; 21% a year from the next day to the day of full payment; 12,640,076 won a year from June 22, 199 to July 21, 199; 21% a year from the next day to the day of full payment; 54,913,670 won a year from September 28, 199 to the day of full payment; and 17% a year from the next day to the day of full payment; and 21% a year from the next day to the day of full payment."

B. The above Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation, based on the above final judgment, received a claim claim amounting to KRW 909,108,666 on June 21, 2007 with respect to the claim amount, such as benefits, etc. that C holds against the Defendant, the garnishee, from the Maritime Court branch of Gwangju District Court to 2007TTT392 (hereinafter “the instant collection order”). The instant collection order was served on the Defendant, the garnishee, who is the garnishee, on July 10, 2007.

C. On July 2007, the said Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation transferred the said final judgment claim to the Plaintiff, notified C of this fact with content certification, and the Plaintiff was issued with respect to the said judgment, and the content thereof was served to C on November 22, 2011.

On the other hand, with respect to the wage claim that C holds against the defendant who is the third debtor, based on the claim amounting to KRW 74,745,205 on January 29, 2005 based on the executory notarial deed by E, a creditor of C, as the creditor of C, as the claim amount, the assignment order of this case is "the assignment order of this case" from the Gwangju District Court's Maritime Branch Court's Maritime Branch Court's 2005Ta

Meanwhile, the Plaintiff’s assignment order is false between E and C.

arrow