logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.05.14 2019나61832
양수금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The plaintiff's grounds for appeal citing the judgment of the court of first instance have been erroneous in the judgment of the court of first instance which did not recognize the defendant as the guarantor, even though the prescription of the principal debtor C has been suspended, and the judgment of the court of first instance as to such assertion is just even if all the evidence submitted are reviewed again.

Accordingly, the court's explanation on the instant case is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for the addition or supplement of the following matters, and thus, citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

[C] 1. Basic Facts

A. A bankrupt corporation A was declared bankrupt on August 16, 2012, and the Plaintiff was appointed as the bankruptcy trustee.

B. On June 22, 2007, A filed a lawsuit against C (main debtor) and the Defendant (joint guarantor) with the Busan District Court Decision 2006da765203, and rendered a judgment on June 22, 2007, “C and the Defendant jointly and severally pay KRW 4,700,000 and the delay damages therefor (hereinafter “instant claim”). The above judgment became final and conclusive on July 17, 2007.

On October 12, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for the instant payment order for the purpose of extending the extinctive prescription period of the instant claim.

C. The primary debtor C was declared bankrupt on April 10, 2008 and was decided to grant immunity on December 4, 2008, by Daejeon District Court Decision 2007Hadan505, 2007Ma5055, and by filing a petition for bankruptcy and immunity with respect to its obligations including the instant claims.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff in the judgment on addition and supplement is deemed to have participated in the bankruptcy procedure by serving a notice, such as a decision, etc., on the plaintiff, who is a bankruptcy creditor in the creditor list, in the bankruptcy and supplement procedure against C, who is the principal debtor.

arrow