logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2017.05.25 2016가단142930
구상금
Text

1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 266,704,884 and KRW 264,49,50 among them, from August 6, 2003 to May 1, 2005.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 9, 2006, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendants, etc. against the Seoul Western District Court Decision 2006Da18641, which sought payment of subrogated amount, etc. under the credit guarantee agreement. On August 18, 2006, the said court rendered a favorable judgment against the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the final judgment of this case”), such as “the Defendant, etc. jointly and severally with the Plaintiff for KRW 264,712,074, and KRW 264,49,50, as to KRW 18% per annum from August 6, 2003 to May 31, 2005, KRW 15% per annum from the next day to June 17, 2006, and KRW 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.” The final judgment of this case became final and conclusive on September 12, 206.

B. After that, the Plaintiff spent the legal procedure cost of KRW 1,992,810 in order to preserve the above judgment claim.

C. On September 7, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application against the Defendants, etc. for the payment order for the extension of the statute of limitations for the instant final and conclusive judgment.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 through 4, purport of whole pleadings]

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendants are jointly and severally obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the above judgment amounting to KRW 266,704,884 (=264,712,074, the legal procedure costs of KRW 1,92,810) and the principal amount of the above judgment amounting to KRW 264,49,50,000 from August 6, 2003 to May 31, 2005; KRW 18% per annum from the next day to June 17, 2006; KRW 20% per annum from the next day to September 30, 2015; and KRW 15% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.

B. The Defendants’ assertion to the effect that the Defendants did not have sufficient means to repay. However, such grounds cannot be deemed as justifiable grounds for refusing the Plaintiff’s claim. Therefore, the Defendants’ assertion is without merit.

3. Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all.

arrow