Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 48,360,00 to the Plaintiffs, as well as 5% per annum from May 31, 2017 to September 14, 2017, respectively.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. Around January 7, 2014, Papum Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Papum”) written a notarial deed (No. 2014 No. 201) stating that a notary public does not raise any objection even if he/she is immediately subject to compulsory execution if he/she delays the payment of the promissorysory note at the place of issuance and payment, on July 31, 2004.
B. On February 17, 2017, the plant workout was applied for the commencement of plant rehabilitation as Daejeon District Court 2017 Ma5006, and on February 24, 2017, the above court issued a comprehensive prohibition order with the effect that “not later than a decision on the application for commencement of rehabilitation procedures, all rehabilitation creditors and rehabilitation secured creditors are prohibited from compulsory execution, provisional seizure, provisional disposition, or auction procedure for the execution of security rights based on rehabilitation claims or rehabilitation security rights.” The above comprehensive prohibition order was served on the plant plant plant plant plant plant plant plant plant plant plant plant plant plant plant plant plant plant plant plant.”
Since then, on April 3, 2017, the above court appointed the plaintiffs as joint managers by deciding to commence the rehabilitation procedure for the plant of species Papex.
C. However, on February 24, 2017, the Defendant applied for a seizure and collection order on February 27, 2017 for a credit card payment claim of KRW 24,360,000 and a credit card payment claim of KRW 24,000,000,000, owned by the Daejeon District Court Branch of Seosan Branch of 2017TT to Samsung Card Co., Ltd. based on the above authentic copy of the authentic deed, and received the decision on February 27, 2017. Then, upon delivery to the third party, the Defendant collected KRW 24,00,000 from the National Card of the Co., Ltd. on March 7, 2017, and KRW 24,360,000 from the Samsung Card Co., Ltd. on March 8, 2017, respectively.
[Judgment of the court below]