(영문) 인천지방법원 2017.06.27 2016가단57108

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) 인천지방법원 2017.06.27 2016가단57108

청구이의

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The bankruptcy trustee B and the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff et al. on January 8, 2003 against the Incheon District Court Decision 2002Gau417790, and the above court rendered a joint decision on the recommendation of execution (hereinafter "the decision on the recommendation of execution of this case") with the content that "the plaintiff et al. shall jointly and severally pay 6,484,884 won to the bankruptcy trustee and the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation of the Gyeonggi Bank of the bankrupt Bank, the amount of 13.5% per annum from January 1, 1998 to January 31, 1998, and the amount of 19% per annum from the next day to the date of full repayment." The decision on the recommendation of execution of this case was finalized on January 31, 2003.

B. The defendant acquired the claim based on the decision of execution recommendation of this case from the bankruptcy trustee B and the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation of the bankrupt Bank.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence No. 1, and the purport of whole pleading

2. The Plaintiff asserts that, on January 31, 2013, a claim based on the decision on performance recommendation of this case shall be extinguished by the ten-year extinctive prescription as of January 31, 2013, compulsory execution based on the decision on performance recommendation of this case shall be dismissed.

On the other hand, according to the purport of the entire pleadings in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, which is prior to the expiration of the extinctive prescription period, the defendant applied for a compulsory auction of the real estate owned by the plaintiff to the Incheon District Court C on February 25, 201 and received a distribution of some amount of claims during the above auction procedure. Thus, the above extinctive prescription period is suspended. Thus, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

유사 판례

-서울동부지방법원 2015.06.19 2014가합14533

-대구지방법원 2016.12.16 2015가합205288

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.12.21 2016가합26391

-의정부지방법원 2017.10.20 2016가단126791

-인천지방법원 2017.06.08 2015가단63748