beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s compulsory execution against the Plaintiff is based on the Seoul Eastern District Court Decision 2007Gadan20083 Decided July 11, 2007.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. According to the judgment rendered on July 11, 2007 in Seoul Eastern District Court Decision 2007Kadan20083 (hereinafter “instant judgment”), the Plaintiff was liable to pay to the Defendant 90,000 won with 5% per annum from March 8, 2007 to July 11, 2007, and damages for delay calculated by 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment (hereinafter “instant obligation”).
B. On August 6, 2007, the Defendant received a seizure and collection order as to the wage claim against the Plaintiff’s hotel (hereinafter “non-party company”) from the Seoul Eastern District Court 2007TTTT4898, and the above order reached the non-party company around that time. On November 14, 2007, the judgment of this case was based on the title of execution, and the Seoul East East East District Court 2007TTT7923, which received the seizure and collection order as to the Plaintiff’s claim against the non-party company, and the above order reached the non-party company around that time.
On June 30, 2008, the defendant applied for the cancellation and renunciation of the seizure and collection order of each of the above Nos. 2007TT 4898 and 2007TT 7923, and notified the non-party company of the cancellation of seizure and collection.
C. On June 30, 2008, the Plaintiff paid KRW 35,000,000 to the Defendant with respect to the instant debt. On the other hand, the Plaintiff issued a promissory note of KRW 41,00,000 to the Defendant as the addressee (Seoul), and a notary public C’s office’s notarial deed with executory power under No. 979 of 2008, and issued it to the Plaintiff. On September 7, 2009, the Plaintiff received a seizure and collection order with respect to the Plaintiff’s wage and retirement allowance payment claims against the Nonparty company under the Seoul East East District Court 2009ta1347, based on the authentic copy of the said notarial deed. The above seizure and collection order reached the non-party company at that time.
The non-party company has seized each of the above claims.