logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2016.04.26 2015나11992
채무부존재확인
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. B, on January 26, 1998, obtained a loan of KRW 20,00,000 from the Namju Credit Union (hereinafter “SP”) at the interest rate of KRW 14.5% and at the interest rate of arrears of KRW 22% (hereinafter “instant loan”). As a result of the death of May 11, 199, the Plaintiff, etc., who is a child of the deceased B (hereinafter “the deceased”), succeeded to the rights and obligations of the deceased.

B. On May 26, 200, the non-party union was declared bankrupt, and the bankruptcy trustee of the non-party union filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff et al., who is the deceased's heir, seeking the payment of the remaining amount of the loan of this case 5,714,286 won and damages for delay thereof (Cheongju District Court 2003Gau12301) and received a favorable judgment on October 10, 2003 (hereinafter "the judgment of this case"). The judgment of this case became final and conclusive on November 1, 2003.

C. On March 31, 2005, the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation transferred the instant loan claim to the Defendant (mutual Financial Corporation, Inc. before the change), and around that time notified the Plaintiff of the assignment of the claim.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including a provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence No. 1, the court's significant facts, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Since the Plaintiff’s claim for the loan of this case expired after the lapse of 10 years from the date the judgment of this case became final and conclusive, there is no obligation of the Plaintiff’s loan against the Defendant.

B. After the judgment of this case became final and conclusive, the completion of extinctive prescription was interrupted by approving the Defendant’s claim for the instant loan against the Plaintiff by requesting the Defendant to issue a certificate of debt.

3. Although it is apparent that the instant claim for the loan of this case was filed on April 28, 2015, the ten-year extinctive prescription from November 1, 2003, in which the instant judgment became final and conclusive, and the instant lawsuit was filed on April 28, 2015, the ten-year period from which the said judgment became final and conclusive, the pleading is made on the statement in Eul evidence 1.

arrow