(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2015.05.01 2014가합10500

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) 서울동부지방법원 2015.05.01 2014가합10500

구상금

Text

1. The plaintiff's lawsuit against the designated person C shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant (appointed party) B.

Reasons

The Plaintiff’s assertion against the Plaintiff’s Appointed is that the Defendant is obliged to pay to the Plaintiff the Plaintiff a total of KRW 109,874,290 (i.e., the principal amount of KRW 25,932,600, plus damages for delay from April 3, 200 to April 30, 2010) and damages for delay from July 16, 2014.

Judgment

Since a final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party has res judicata effect, in case where the party who has received the final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party files a lawsuit again against the other party to the lawsuit identical to the previous judgment in favor of one party, the subsequent lawsuit is unlawful

In full view of the purport of the argument in Gap evidence No. 2, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit with this court (2010da157) against the Appointed C, and on May 19, 2010, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit with this court for the payment of the loan, and on May 19, 2010, the court rendered a favorable judgment that "C shall pay to the plaintiff 25,932,600 won and its related interest rate of 25% per annum from April 3, 200 to December 31, 2009, 5% per annum from the next day to March 12, 2010, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of complete payment." The above judgment becomes final and conclusive on June 8, 2010, and the plaintiff can recognize the fact that the plaintiff had the same claim as the claim finalized by the judgment of this case against the Appointed C as the plaintiff in this case.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the appointed party C is unlawful because there is no benefit of protection of rights.

(3) The Plaintiff’s obligee, who claimed against Defendant B, transferred his/her own property to Defendant B to evade compulsory execution from October 200 to July 2014. As such, Defendant B is jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff the said loan obligation to the Plaintiff.

Judgment

The Appointor C transferred its property to Defendant B to evade compulsory execution.

Hadar, such as this.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2019.06.21 2019가단661

-부산지방법원 2018.12.19 2016가합2089

-청주지방법원 2019.07.11 2019가단22159

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.05.12 2019가단5179713

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.02.13 2019가단5244136