beta
Text
1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 953,469,295 as well as KRW 932,870,317 as to the plaintiff. From September 29, 2003 to December 28, 2003.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On August 21, 2008, the Plaintiff (Korea Technology Credit Guarantee Fund) filed a lawsuit against the Defendant Company as Seoul Central District Court Decision 2008Da242979, and was sentenced by the above court on August 21, 2008 that “the Defendant Company, etc. jointly and severally with the Plaintiff KRW 948,268,854 and KRW 942,420,257 shall be jointly and severally with the Plaintiff; 14% per annum from September 29, 2003 to December 28, 2003; 16% per annum from the following day to July 14, 2008; and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.” The above judgment became final and conclusive as is September 17, 2008.
(hereinafter “the final judgment of this case”). (b)
After the final and conclusive judgment of this case, KRW 9,549,940 is recovered, and the amount of subrogated payment, which is a claim based on the final and conclusive judgment of this case, is KRW 932,870,317, and the amount of damages finalized by each recovery date for the recovered amount is KRW 15,18,678, and the amount of subrogated payment is KRW 5,410,300.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 4
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of claim, barring special circumstances, the defendant company is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 953,469,295 won, such as subrogated payment, etc. under the final judgment of this case (i.e., the balance of the subrogated payment of KRW 932,870,317 by subrogation of KRW 5,410,30 by subrogation of KRW 15,188,678), and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 14% per annum from September 29, 2003 to December 28, 2003 in accordance with the final judgment of this case as to the amount of subrogated payment of KRW 932,870,317 by subrogation of KRW 932,469,29,295 (i.e., the amount of subrogated payment of KRW 932,870,300 by subrogation of the original copy of the payment order of this case by July 16, 2018.
B. As to the assertion of the Defendant Company, the Defendant Company: (a) concluded that the instant final judgment became extinct due to the expiration of the ten-year extinctive prescription.