(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.11.30 2018나39548

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.11.30 2018나39548

구상금

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. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 1995, the Plaintiff (the Korea Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd.) concluded an installment sales guarantee contract between the Defendant and the policyholder, Hyundai Motor Co., Ltd., the insurance amount of KRW 4,950,00, and the insurance period from July 20, 1995 to July 19, 198, for the guarantee of the payment of installments when the Defendant purchases the vehicle in installment.

B. When the Defendant delayed the payment of the above installment, the above company, the insured, claimed for the payment of the insurance money to the Plaintiff, and on June 28, 1996, the Plaintiff paid KRW 4,190,293 as the insurance money to the above company.

C. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant as Seoul District Court 98Gaso207292, and the above court rendered a judgment on July 7, 1998 that "the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 5,348,191 won and 4,190,293 won with 27% interest per annum from January 15, 1998 to the date of complete payment" and the above judgment was finalized on July 30, 1998.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the above 5,348,191 won with the amount of indemnity and 4,190,293 won with the interest of 27% per annum from January 15, 1998 to the day of full payment, unless there are special circumstances.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. First, the Defendant asserts that there was no installment sales guarantee contract concluded with the Plaintiff for the purchase of vehicles.

On the other hand, since a final and conclusive favorable judgment has res judicata effect, the parties cannot file a new suit on the basis of the same subject matter of lawsuit as the final and conclusive judgment, in principle, or in exceptional circumstances such as the interruption of prescription, a new suit shall be exceptionally allowed. In such cases, the judgment of a new suit shall be prior to the previous suit

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.12 2017나82583

-서울중앙지방법원 2018. 1. 31. 선고 2017나43304 판결

-수원지방법원 2018.11.23 2018가단10032

-의정부지방법원 2018.05.18 2018가합50703

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.09.22 2017가단5033158