beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s loans to the Seoul Northern District Court Decision 2016Kadan15614 decided July 18, 2017.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On July 18, 2017, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiffs (Seoul Northern District Court 2016Kadan15614), and rendered a judgment that “the Defendant jointly pays to the Plaintiff 120,000,000 won and interest calculated at the rate of 5% per annum from August 31, 2011 to October 15, 2016, and 15% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment” (hereinafter “instant judgment”), and the instant judgment became final and conclusive on August 4, 2017.
B. The Defendant, based on the instant judgment on August 8, 2017, received a decision to commence compulsory auction (U.S. District Court Ansan support E) as to No. 101 and 406 of the former D apartment No. 101 during Gyeyang-si owned by the Plaintiff.
2,774,134 won (=2,10,174 won for auction deposit, stamp fee of KRW 5,00 for stamp, KRW 3,000 for application for registration, service fee of KRW 259,00 for registration fee, and registration license tax of KRW 396,960 for registration) paid by the Defendant in the above auction procedure. 683,160 out of the above auction deposit amount was used until the auction procedure is suspended, and 1,427,014 remains.
C. On August 11, 2017, the Plaintiffs deposited KRW 165,550,684 with the Defendant as the principal deposit (Seoul District Court Decision 2012Da3673, Jun. 11, 2017).
[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 4 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. The expenses required for the compulsory execution under Article 53(1) of the Civil Execution Act with respect to the cause of the claim shall be borne by the debtor, and the expenses for such execution shall be reimbursed preferentially in the execution. The expenses are based on the relevant executive titles that form the basis for the execution without any separate executive titles and can be collected together with the claims indicated in the executive titles in the relevant compulsory execution procedures. As such, in a case of a demurrer, insofar as the expenses for the execution that the debtor is liable to reimburse are not repaid even if the original obligation indicated in the executive titles became extinct by repayment or deposit.