(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.06.21 2015가단10373

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.06.21 2015가단10373

추심금

Text

1. The Defendant amounting to KRW 30 million to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 5% from January 22, 2015 to June 21, 2016.

Reasons

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The following facts do not conflict between the parties or can be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each statement of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 4 and 16:

1) The Plaintiff is an Ednoba Co., Ltd., Ltd. (hereinafter “Ednoba”) with the Goyang-gu District Court 2014Kadan7455

35,446,730 won of the goods price claim against the Defendant is the claim, and the non-party company has installed gold automation equipment and machinery, etc. to the Defendant and applied for provisional attachment against the claims such as the price of goods to be paid by the Defendant, and on February 24, 2014, the provisional attachment decision from the above court (hereinafter “the provisional attachment decision of this case”).

2) On January 19, 2015, the provisional attachment order of this case was issued to the defendant around that time. After that time, the plaintiff applied for the provisional attachment order of this case against the non-party company for the provisional attachment of 35,446,730 won, the provisional attachment amount of 4,211,871 won, which is the provisional attachment amount of 35,471 won, from the above court, and was issued the provisional attachment order of this case to the defendant on January 21, 2015. The provisional attachment order of this case was issued to the defendant on January 21, 2015.

3) Meanwhile, around September 2013, Nonparty Company 3230 R from the Defendant (hereinafter “instant product”)

on September 13, 2013, after being awarded a contract for gold-type development for production KRW 300 million, the Defendant received KRW 120 million out of the advance payment.

B. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant, the third debtor, is obligated to pay the amount equivalent to the plaintiff's collection amount to the non-party company within the scope of the unpaid monetary development amount to the non-party company.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant asserts that the advance payment of the gold-type development amount of KRW 300 million is KRW 120 million.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원포항지원 2017.08.08 2016가단2732

-창원지방법원 2018.08.03 2017나6201

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2015.04.30 2014가합53455

-서울동부지방법원 2017.05.31 2016나26039

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.05.04 2015가단5396121