beta
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. The following facts are found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the statements in Gap evidence 1-1, 2, 3, 1-2, 1-2, 2, 3, and 5, and the purport of Gap's testimony and all pleadings.
A. On June 22, 2013, B entered into a contract for the consignment of pigs with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant consignment of pigs”), and subsequently, B concluded a contract for the consignment of pigs (hereinafter “instant consignment of pigs”), and entrusted the Defendant’s consignment of raising KRW 35,000 per two pigs.
B. On September 3, 2013, the Plaintiff received a collection order for the seizure and collection of the claim amounting to KRW 12,109,700 from the Daegu District Court’s Sung Branch support 2013TTTT 586 with respect to the claim for the entrusted raising expenses against the Defendant (hereinafter “instant collection order”) on September 6, 2013.
C. On the other hand, C, based on the executory performance of the instant case, the Daegu District Court 2013Gau463, the Gun Court 2013Gau463, and the same court 2013Kagi1 (determination and correction), seized 200 B, which was entrusted by the Defendant, as the Daegu District Court 2019, Sept. 11, 2013.
B and the Defendant terminated the instant consignment breeding contract on November 29, 2013, and settled the accounts as follows (No. 1). At the time, the status of pigs was 757Dus, 707Dus, 48Dus, and 95Dus.
① The Defendant’s damage claim amounting to KRW 56,245,00 (i.e., KRW 1,607du x 35,000) ② The Defendant’s damage claim amounting to KRW 20,70,000 relating to the shortage (i.e., a report on the closure of death x 39 x 56 x 3 million): The amount of KRW 4,00,000 relating to attachment (i.e., KRW 200 x 200,00) ③ The amount finally paid to the Defendant by B: KRW 4,45,00 (i.e., KRW 4,07 million - KRW 56,245,00)
2. Summary of the parties' arguments
A. The defendant's 200 heads of pigs attached by the plaintiff C is not subject to seizure.
The defendant voluntarily renounces his ownership after the collection order of this case was delivered, and converted it to the damage claim and converted it into the entrusted breeding expenses of B.