beta
Text
1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 60,00,000 for the Plaintiff and its related KRW 5% per annum from November 16, 2007 to March 6, 2015; and (b) March 7, 2015 for the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. C: (a) the Defendant issued a provisional seizure order against the obligor and its claim amount of KRW 150,00,00 with respect to each forest located in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, the maximum debt amount of KRW 500,00,00 with respect to each forest located in D, E, F, G, and H; and (b) on September 18, 2007, the Ulsan-do District Court rendered a decision of provisional seizure against the secured mortgage claim with respect to the debtor’s right to create a new mortgage (the debtor’s right to create a new mortgage) with respect to the debtor’s right to create a new mortgage (the right to create a new mortgage) on September 30, 1997, under Incheon District Court Decision 207Kahap489, March 5, 2007; and (c) on July 18, 2007, the Seoul District Court rendered a judgment of KRW 150,000,5232 with respect to the Defendant’s claim for the guaranteed debt amount.
B. On November 16, 2007, C transferred to the Plaintiff the claim against C regarding KRW 60,000,000 among the claim against C against the Defendant, and notified the Defendant of the assignment of the claim on May 27, 2015.
[Grounds for Recognition: Evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Evidence No. 12-1 through 3, 13, Evidence No. 13 and 19, and the purport of the whole pleadings]
2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of claim, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff, the transferee of the claim, the amount of KRW 60,00,000, and as requested by the plaintiff, 5% per annum under the Civil Act from November 16, 2007, which is the date of conclusion of the contract for acceptance of claims to the plaintiff, until March 6, 2015, on which the original copy of the payment order in lieu of the copy of the complaint in this case was served on the defendant, and 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from March 7, 2015 to the date of full payment.
3. The defendant's assertion is judged against the defendant by using a forged subcontract document that C does not have any security deposit claim against the defendant.