logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.05.19 2016나30461
양수금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant ordered C to undertake the construction of shipbuilding and house construction in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant building”) and C subcontracted the removal and roof construction of the instant building (hereinafter “instant removal and roof construction”).

B. The Defendant paid C the construction cost of the instant building in KRW 5,00,000,000 on October 21, 2012, and KRW 5,000,000 on November 8, 2012, respectively.

C. E performed the removal and roof construction of this case from October 21, 2012 to November 29, 2012.

C Around January 12, 2015, the Plaintiff, as E’s wife, entered into a contract under which KRW 12,598,550 of the instant removal and roof work price and KRW 22,59,550 of the accrued construction price (hereinafter “instant contract for the assignment of claims”) and claims for delayed payment thereof, and sent a notice of the assignment of claims by content-certified mail on January 23, 2015, and F, as the Defendant’s partner, received the said notice on January 26, 2015.

E. C died on February 6, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 8, 9, 12, 13, Eul evidence Nos. 2 and video (including various numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the main defense of this case

A. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion was that the Plaintiff received the claim for the removal of the instant case and the roof construction cost from C for the purpose of filing the instant lawsuit, and thus the assignment of the instant claim constitutes a litigation trust act and null

B. 1) In a case where the assignment of claims, etc. primarily takes place with the aim of enabling a litigation, the assignment of claims is null and void by applying Article 6 of the Trust Act mutatis mutandis even though it does not constitute a trust under the Trust Act. Whether it is the principal purpose of making a litigation ought to be determined in light of all the circumstances, including the developments and methods of concluding the assignment of claims contract, interval between the transfer contract and the filing of the lawsuit, and the relationship between the transferor and the transferee, etc. (see

arrow