본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
부산지방법원서부지원 2019.02.19 2017가단109937

No. 1611 of the deed drawn up by Claw Firm on September 29, 2017 by the defendant's notary public against the plaintiff.


1.The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, and 6 (including paper numbers):

On August 5, 2016, the Plaintiff contracted to the Defendant for the construction of the Gangseo-gu Busan Metropolitan Government D and E-Dong 5 new construction of the five units of multi-family housing (hereinafter “instant construction”) in total of KRW 141 million.

B. The Defendant completed the construction, and the Plaintiff paid the Defendant the total amount of KRW 50 million out of the construction cost by August 16, 2016.

C. On September 4, 2017, the Defendant made a claim claim amounting to KRW 98 million and filed an application for provisional seizure of the said claim amount among the Plaintiff’s deposit claims against F Co., Ltd. as to the amount up to the claim amount, and the Plaintiff was delegated to Nonparty G on September 8, 2017. A notary public belonging to the Changwon District Prosecutors’ Office delegated Nonparty G to resolve the claim. C law firm, a Plaintiff’s agent, as the Plaintiff’s agent, prepares a notarial deed (No. 1611, 2017, and hereinafter “notarial deed”). On September 29, 2017, as entrusted by G and the Defendant, a notary public belonging to the Changwon District Prosecutors’ Office, as the Plaintiff’s agent, prepared a notarial deed (payment on September 10, 2017) of a debt repayment agreement (No. 1611, 2017, and hereinafter “notarial deed”).

On September 21, 2017, the Plaintiff paid an additional amount of KRW 50 million to the Defendant as the price for the instant construction project.

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff’s debt, which is the cause for the preparation of the instant notarial deed, shall be deemed to have the remainder of the Plaintiff’s debt of the instant construction against the Defendant, as well as the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from October 11, 2017 to the date of full payment, which is the following day of the due date (the Defendant shall not claim the interest until the due date). Thus, execution based on the Defendant’s notarial deed against the Plaintiff shall be denied only for the portion exceeding the same amount.