(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.01.17 2019가단48111

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 2020.01.17 2019가단48111

청구이의의 소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The facts of recognition C Co., Ltd. had a credit card user claim against the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant claim”). However, the instant claim was transferred to D Co., Ltd. on March 12, 2004, and was transferred to B on May 28, 2004, and the Plaintiff was notified of the transfer of the claim. On August 16, 2012, B Co., Ltd was declared bankrupt and the Defendant was appointed as bankruptcy trustee.

On April 1, 2016, the Defendant filed a payment order with the Seoul Central District Court (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2016Da121131, and the said court rendered a payment order with the purport that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant the amount of KRW 4,378,861 and delay damages for KRW 881,397” (hereinafter “instant payment order”) on April 20, 2016. The said payment order was finalized on June 30, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s claim in this case was extinguished upon repayment of all of the claims around 2006.

In addition, the extinctive prescription of the instant claim was completed.

Therefore, compulsory execution based on the payment order of this case should not be allowed.

3. First of all, there is no evidence to support the Plaintiff’s assertion of repayment that the principal and interest of the instant claim remain less than the amount ordered to pay in the instant payment order after the Plaintiff repaid the principal and interest of the instant claim.

Next, since the defendant alleged that the extinctive prescription of the plaintiff's claim for the completion of the above extinctive prescription has been interrupted, if the whole purport of pleading is added to the statement in the statement in Ministry of Health and Welfare No. 1, it is recognized that the plaintiff paid part of the claim in this case by April 6, 201, according to the debt settlement plan of E institution. Such part of the plaintiff's payment constitutes an approval of debt, and thus, the extinctive prescription of the claim in this case has been interrupted by April 6, 201, and as recognized earlier.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.01.17 2019가단48111

-부산지방법원 2017.10.25 2017가합783

-전주지방법원 2019.05.03 2018가단19127

-전주지방법원 정읍지원 2021.04.06 2019가단11409

-의정부지방법원 2016.11.10 2016나6263