beta
Text
1. The defendant's decision of the Daejeon District Court's Daejeon District Court's 2016Ka 1189 amount of litigation costs against the plaintiff is based on the final decision of the case.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. C filed a motion against the Plaintiff to determine the amount of litigation costs in the Daejeon District Court’s 2014Gahap3804 case for the revocation of the claim for provisional registration for transfer of ownership and the amount of litigation costs that the Plaintiff is obligated to repay to C by the said judgment (Seoul District Court Decision 2016Kada1189, hereinafter “the instant decision”) and the instant decision became final and conclusive on June 1, 2017.
B. C applied for a compulsory auction on the real estate owned by the Plaintiff on the basis of the original copy of the instant decision and the judgment rendered by the District Court Decision 2015Kadan119307 case, and the decision to commence the auction was rendered on January 4, 2018.
C. On October 19, 2018, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 44,006,727, including the instant decision amount as the Jung-gu District Court No. 6611, Jun. 19, 2018, and C withdrawn on November 9, 2018.
On the other hand, around October 22, 2018, C transferred a claim under the instant decision to the Defendant and notified the Plaintiff of the transfer of the claim and reached the Plaintiff on October 23, 2018. The Defendant was granted the succession execution clause regarding the instant decision on December 19, 2018.
[Reasons for Recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3-5, Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 4 (including additional numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the above facts of recognition, it is determined that the claim for the amount of litigation expenses of the decision of this case was extinguished by the deposit for repayment (the defendant also acknowledges that the deposit was appropriated for the amount of the above decision). Therefore, compulsory execution based on the decision of this case should be dismissed.
3. The plaintiff's claim is justified.