logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.08.10 2015가단54828
채무부존재확인
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. 당사자의 주장 원고는, 피고와 사이에 피보험자를 소외 할더룀헬드코리아 주식회사로 하여 하자이행보증보험계약을 체결하였는데, 피고는 2014. 11. 14. 소외 회사에게 보험금 555만 원을 지급하였다는 이유로 원고에 대하여 구상금 555만 원 등을 청구하고 있는바, 이 사건 소로써 그 부존재 확인을 구한다고 주장한다.

As to this, the defendant filed a claim suit against the plaintiff prior to the filing of the lawsuit in this case, such as the claim amount of the above insurance money, and the lawsuit is pending. The lawsuit in this case is unlawful as there is no benefit of the lawsuit in this case.

2. In a case where a lawsuit for performance is instituted against an obligee for the same obligation to determine the legitimacy of the lawsuit in this case, and a lawsuit for confirmation of non-existence has been instituted against an obligor during the course of the lawsuit, the obligor may assert that the obligee does not have a claim against the obligor by seeking a judgment of dismissal of claim in the performance lawsuit. Thus, there is no benefit to seek confirmation that there is no obligation against the obligee

(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Da22246 Decided July 24, 2001, etc.). With respect to the instant case, there is no dispute between the parties concerned as to the fact that the Defendant filed a claim suit against the Plaintiff, including the amount of reimbursement for the said insurance money, with the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2014Da880680.

Thus, the lawsuit of this case against the defendant seeking confirmation of the absence of the obligation, such as the above indemnity, is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit.

In a case where a lawsuit seeking confirmation of non-existence of an obligation is pending, the Plaintiff shall not be registered as a non-performance of obligation pursuant to Article 8 of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Thus, the lawsuit of this case is in interest in the lawsuit. However, the above provision is pending in the lawsuit seeking confirmation of non-existence of an obligation,

arrow