beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 50,000,000 as well as the annual rate of KRW 5% from September 28, 2018 to August 26, 2020 as to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The facts based on the facts are stated in the separate sheet [each claim attachment and collection order against the plaintiff against the defendant], and each of the above claims attachment and collection order (hereinafter "the seizure and collection order of this case") at the time when the defendant is to be served on the defendant, Eul Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "E") has a claim for pelpelpelpelpellets (hereinafter "the claim for pelpelpelpelpelpel") equivalent to KRW 50 million against the defendant, or there is no dispute between the parties, or the whole purport of the arguments in each statement mentioned in the evidence No. 1 through No. 5 (including each number) of No. 5 (including each number).
2. Determination:
A. The Plaintiff filed a claim for KRW 94,666,032 of the collection amount. However, there is no evidence to support the fact that the Plaintiff’s claim for pelpelpelpellets against the Defendant, for whom the collection order was issued, reaches KRW 94,66,032.
However, according to the above facts and the evidence mentioned above, since the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant in E at the time of receiving the seizure and collection order of this case is recognized as the cause of KRW 50,000,000, and barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the collection amount of KRW 50,000,000 and delay damages.
The plaintiff's assertion is justified within the above scope of recognition.
B. As to the defendant's assertion and judgment, the defendant bears 20,000,000 won of the price for the goods to E, but the defendant asserts that the non-party F Co., Ltd., the creditor of provisional attachment against E, paid 20,000 won of the above goods on October 5, 2016, prior to the delivery of the plaintiff's seizure and collection order to the defendant. Since there was no transaction with E, the defendant cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim for the collection of this case.
The evidence presented by the defendant, as shown above, and consistent with the above argument, is a statement at the first day of pleading by the defendant's agent, and the defendant is a prior suit with the plaintiff.