(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.04.03 2014재머10

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 2015.04.03 2014재머10

제소전화해

Text

1. The quasi-examination of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of quasi-examination shall be borne by the respondent.

Reasons

1. Final decision subject to quasi-examination;

A. On May 2, 2013, the applicant filed an application with the respondent for a payment order seeking payment of the amount indicated in the purport of the application with the Suwon District Court Annwon Branch Branch No. 2013 tea207, and the reasons for the application were that “the respondent shall pay the respondent the amount of KRW 75 million which was unpaid among the KRW 100 million agreed upon on October 31, 2010, KRW 75 million, KRW 10 million due to the applicant’s injury to the respondent, and delay damages for each of the above amounts.”

B. On July 4, 2013, the respondent raised an objection against the payment order dated May 23, 2013 with the foregoing content, and the applicant filed an application for conciliation of the instant case on September 6, 2013.

C. On March 14, 2014, the Seoul Central District Court rendered a decision in lieu of conciliation as follows (hereinafter “instant decision”) on March 14, 2014, based on the applicant’s above request for conciliation, in Seoul Central District Court 2013ss money57562.

1) The respondent shall pay 50 million won to the applicant by May 31, 2014. Provided, That where the above amount is not paid by the payment date, the respondent shall pay the unpaid amount plus 5% per annum from October 31, 2010 to May 10, 2013, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment. 2) The remainder of the applicants shall be waived.

3) Expenses for conciliation shall be borne by each party. D. The respondent was served on April 25, 2014 on the instant ruling and did not submit a written objection within two weeks thereafter on April 25, 2014. The instant ruling became final and conclusive on May 13, 2014. [In the absence of any dispute over the grounds for recognition, the court is significant fact, evidence No. 1, and the purport of the entire pleadings.”

2. Respondent's assertion and judgment

A. On October 31, 2010, the respondent, by deception of the applicant, prepared a note of payment as of October 31, 201 by deception of the applicant, and had no obligation to pay the original amount of KRW 75 million, and the applicant filed a copy of the order for payment, and the applicant suffered injury.

유사 판례

-대법원 1980. 12. 9. 선고 79다1317 판결

-서울서부지방법원 2017.06.15 2016재머1012

-서울고법 1965. 1. 13. 선고 64나948 제6민사항소부판결 : 확상

-울산지방법원 2008. 9. 22.자 2008브4 결정

-울산지방법원 2008. 9. 22. 자 2008브4 결정