logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2015.05.12 2014가단27103 (2)
전부금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 13, 2012, the Plaintiff issued a claim attachment and assignment order (hereinafter “instant assignment order”) with respect to KRW 67,597,846 out of the claim for construction payment against the Defendant of Han-won District Court No. 2013, Jun. 13, 2012, based on the executory exemplification of the loan case No. 2009Da75979 against Han-ri Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Korea-Japan”) (hereinafter “instant assignment order”).

B. The above attachment and assignment order was served on Korea-China on August 24, 2012, and each of the Defendant on June 15, 2012, and became final and conclusive on September 1, 2012.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The plaintiff's assertion is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the full amount of KRW 67,597,846 according to the assignment order of this case and damages for delay from the day after the defendant was served with the assignment order of this case.

B. (1) Even if an assignment order of the pertinent legal doctrine was legally issued and confirmed in the process, the effect of the assignment order that is to be transferred to the execution creditor is premised on the existence of the entire claim, so the execution creditor seeking the payment of the entire claim against the third debtor must prove the existence of the entire claim.

(2) In the instant case, it is insufficient to recognize the fact that Han Liber entered into a construction contract with the Defendant with the sole evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, and the fact that Han Liber completed the work in accordance with the construction contract and the construction contract, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit to further examine.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow