(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2021.01.26 2020가단3110

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) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2021.01.26 2020가단3110

추심금

Text

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 31,905,987 won and the interest rate of 12% per annum from June 20, 2020 to the day of full payment.

Reasons

Facts of recognition

The Plaintiff filed an application for a seizure and collection order with respect to KRW 61,203,417 among the monthly rent bonds of the non-party company (the debtor) against the defendant of the non-party company (the debtor of the non-party company (hereinafter "the real estate of this case") by taking the amount of the claim as KRW 156,203,417 according to the decision of the case of indirect compulsory enforcement D (hereinafter "the above indirect compulsory enforcement order of this case") against the Gwangju District Court's pure Branch D (hereinafter "non-party company"), and filed an application for a seizure and collection order with respect to KRW 61,203,417 among the monthly rent bonds of the non-party company (the debtor of the non-party company). On November 26, 2019, the original collection order of this case was served on the defendant on November 39, 2019.

On the other hand, on July 5, 2017, the non-party company leased the instant real estate to the Defendant with a deposit of KRW 400 million and monthly rent of KRW 9.9 million. The Defendant did not pay a monthly rent to the non-party company since November 29, 2019 upon receipt of the authentic copy of the instant collection decision.

On September 10, 2020, the non-party company deposited KRW 124,297,430 with respect to the claim claims under the above paragraph (a).

[Ground of recognition] The defendant asserts to the effect that the decision of collection of this case is invalid, since the non-party company fully performs its obligations to the plaintiff based on the decision of indirect compulsory enforcement of this case, and the plaintiff's lawsuit for collection of this case must be dismissed.

However, the termination of indirect compulsory payment claims falling under the execution claim of the collection decision of this case is a reason for the non-party company to claim in the lawsuit of demurrer against the claim, and it is not a reason for the defendant to claim in the lawsuit of collection of this case. Thus, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

The judgment on the merits of the above paragraph 1 is recognized, in particular, against the defendant's non-party company.

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 순천지원 2021.01.26 2020가단3110

-서울중앙지방법원 2014. 05. 14. 선고 2013가단5185730 판결

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.03.17 2016가단73192

-서울서부지방법원 2007. 8. 9. 선고 2007나1924 판결

-수원지방법원 2020.07.02 2019구합66140