logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2021.03.30 2020가단17978
추심금
Text

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 42,151,443 won and the interest rate of 12% per annum from September 16, 2020 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. 1) On August 12, 2020, the Plaintiff: (a) based on the executory payment order in the loan case between Incheon District Court 2020, the Incheon District Court 2020, KRW 42,151,443, the Plaintiff submitted the instant construction contract to the Defendant on August 22, 202, the Defendant and C submitted to the Defendant on June 22, 2017 each of the following documents: (b) 80 units of multi-household housing (10 units of housing, 4 units of land, 10 units of land, 10 units of land, 10 units of land, 10 units of land, 200 units of land, 20 units of land, 20 units of land, 30 units of land, 30 units of land, 30 units of land, 30 units of land, 207 units of land, 3080 units of land, 201.

3) The instant claim for construction work payment against the Defendant, which was settled pursuant to the instant construction contract, is equivalent to KRW 1,700,000,000.

[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1-6, the entire purport of pleading

B. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 42,151,443 won collected and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 12% per annum from September 16, 2020 to the day of complete payment, which is the day after the day of complete payment of the copy of the complaint of this case.

The defendant asserts that there is no enforcement claim of the plaintiff, a collection creditor, but the non-existence or extinction of enforcement claim cannot be denied by the defendant's assertion as a defense against the third person as the third person in the lawsuit of collection as the reason for the claimant's objection to the claim (see Supreme Court Decision 94Da34012 delivered on November 11, 1994), and the above argument by the defendant is with merit.

arrow