logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.08.29 2017가단5074951
양수금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. In full view of the respective descriptions of evidence Nos. 1 through 7 and the purport of the entire pleadings as to the cause of the claim, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid principal and interest and delay damages, such as the statement in the purport of the claim.

2. The Defendant asserts to the effect that “the extinctive prescription has been completed with respect to the instant claim”

In full view of the evidence evidence No. 7 and the purport of the whole pleadings, it can be known that the instant lawsuit was filed after the lapse of 10 years from the time when the payment order for the instant claim became final and conclusive ( August 4, 2006), and no other evidence exists to deem that there was a interruption of extinctive prescription.

Therefore, the defendant's argument is reasonable, and the claim in this case was extinguished by the completion of extinctive prescription.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit.

arrow