logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2019.05.16 2018가단26127
청구이의
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. In full view of the purport of the argument in the evidence No. 1 on the premise that the defendant filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff for a loan claim against the plaintiff, and sentenced on July 12, 2017, Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2016Da100685, which ordered the payment of 98 million won and damages for delay thereof, and recognized the fact that the above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

2. The plaintiff's assertion asserts that the plaintiff fully repaid the debt borrowed from the above judgment, and that the letter of payment was drawn up upon the defendant's intimidation.

3. According to the Plaintiff’s assertion of determination, the Plaintiff fully repaid the above loan debt by October 31, 2015. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the evidence No. 1, the date of closing argument in the final and conclusive judgment can be acknowledged as the date of June 28, 2017.

Furthermore, the argument that the plaintiff prepared a written rejection of payment with the defendant's intimidation seems to have occurred before the date of closing argument in the above final judgment.

The plaintiff's primary claim is seeking confirmation of the non-existence of the loan debt of the above final judgment, but all the grounds arise prior to the date of closing argument of the above final judgment.

Therefore, in the instant lawsuit, the existence of an obligation to borrow money cannot be acknowledged as at the time of the closing of argument in the final and conclusive judgment based on res judicata of the above final and conclusive judgment.

(See Supreme Court Decision 94Da8037 delivered on September 9, 1994, etc.). Therefore, the Plaintiff’s primary claim is without merit.

The Plaintiff’s conjunctive claim is a non-permission of compulsory execution based on the above final judgment. However, in a case where the enforcement title, which is the subject of an objection in a lawsuit of demurrer, is a final and conclusive judgment, the grounds arise after the closure of pleadings at the fact-finding court in the relevant lawsuit, and even if the circumstances arising earlier were to have not been asserted before the closing of pleadings because the obligor was unaware of such circumstances,

arrow