logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2020.04.23 2018가합886
추심금
Text

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 308,021,262 won and the interest rate of 10% per annum from April 1, 2009 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the claim for the collection amount under the Changwon District Court 2008Gahap2821.

B. On July 15, 2008, when the plaintiff and the defendant joint representative C attended the above lawsuit on July 15, 2008, mediation was concluded that "the defendant shall pay 308,021,262 won to the plaintiff until March 31, 2009. If the defendant fails to pay the above amount by the above payment date, it shall be paid by adding 10% per annum from the day following the payment date to the day of full payment."

(hereinafter referred to as “instant conciliation”). [Grounds for recognition] The entry of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. (1) Since a final and conclusive judgment in favor of a party has res judicata effect on the cause of the claim, where the party who received the final and conclusive judgment in favor of the other party files a lawsuit against the other party for the same claim as the previous suit in favor of the final and conclusive judgment in favor of the other party, the subsequent suit

However, in exceptional cases where the ten-year period of extinctive prescription of a claim based on a final and conclusive judgment is imminent, there is a benefit in a lawsuit for the interruption of prescription.

Furthermore, in such a case, the judgment of the subsequent suit shall not conflict with the final and conclusive judgment in favor of the previous suit, and thus, the court of the subsequent suit cannot re-examine whether all requirements are satisfied to assert the established right.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2018Da22008 Decided July 19, 2018). The same applies to a protocol of mediation with the same effect as a final and conclusive judgment.

(2) Since it is apparent that the Plaintiff filed an application for the instant payment order for the extension of the prescription on June 20, 2018, immediately before the lapse of 10 years from the date of establishment of the instant conciliation, according to the foregoing legal doctrine, the Defendant shall pay 308,021,262 won to the Plaintiff and 10% per annum from April 1, 2009 to the date of full payment.

arrow