logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원해남지원 2017.08.22 2016가단3550
청구이의
Text

1. The Defendant’s payment order for the Plaintiff is based on the payment order for the case 2016Da331 rendered by the Seoul District Court for the Republic of Korea.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 18, 2006, the defendant lent KRW 206,500,000 to C Co., Ltd., and the plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed the above company's debt.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant claim”) claims arising from the said joint and several sureties

The Defendant issued a payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) to the Plaintiff, a joint guarantor, with the Seoul District Court 2016Da331, the Full Gun Court 2016. On October 5, 2016, the said court issued a payment order stating that “The Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant the amount calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from the day after the original copy of the payment order was served to the Defendant and the next day after the original copy of the payment order was served.” The instant payment order was finalized on November 12, 2016.

C. On July 1, 2011, prior to the Defendant’s filing an application for the instant payment order, the Plaintiff filed a bankruptcy and application for immunity with the Gwangju District Court Decision 201Haak2256, 201Mo2257, July 1, 201. At the time, the Plaintiff did not enter the Defendant’s claim against the Plaintiff in the list of creditors.

On October 19, 2012, the above court decided to grant immunity to the plaintiff, and the above decision was finalized on November 27, 2012.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The right to claim property arising before the declaration of bankruptcy against the debtor for the judgment on the cause of the claim, namely, the bankruptcy claim, even if the immunity decision on the bankrupt becomes final and conclusive and is not entered in the list of creditors at the time of the application for immunity, unless it falls under the case of the proviso of Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, the effect of immunity pursuant to Article 565 of the same Act is exempted, and the right to file a lawsuit and executive force of ordinary claims are lost.

According to the facts acknowledged above, the defendant's claim of this case against the plaintiff, which was the basis of the payment order of this case.

arrow