logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2015.05.21 2015가단710
청구이의
Text

1. The Defendant’s compulsory execution against the Plaintiff by the Changwon District Court Decision 2013Gauri9676 Decided November 20, 2013.

Reasons

In full view of the purport of the arguments in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the defendant filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff and Eul as the Changwon District Court 2013Gada96476 on Mar. 22, 2013. The above court rendered a judgment on Nov. 20, 2013 that "C shall pay to the defendant the amount of KRW 17 million and the delay damages from July 27, 2012, and the plaintiff shall jointly and severally pay the above amount of KRW 14 million and the delay damages from July 27, 2012." The above judgment becomes final and conclusive at that time, and the plaintiff may recognize the fact that the plaintiff paid all the amount of KRW 14 million and the delay damages from the above amount to the defendant on Apr. 1, 2014 as compensation for delay.

According to the above facts of recognition, it is judged that the obligation to pay 14 million won and damages for delay ordered the plaintiff to pay to the defendant in the above judgment was all extinguished due to the plaintiff's repayment.

In this regard, the defendant recognized that the plaintiff and D jointly are liable for the above judgment, and argued to the effect that D does not have a certain residence, and that the plaintiff should enforce compulsory execution. However, as seen earlier, the above judgment only recognized the obligation to jointly and severally pay to the plaintiff 14 million won out of D's debts, and it cannot be subject to compulsory execution against the plaintiff whose obligation has already ceased to exist because D's residence. Thus, the defendant's argument is without merit.

Therefore, since the plaintiff's obligation against the defendant who ordered payment in the above judgment is all extinguished by repayment, compulsory execution based on the above judgment against the defendant should not be allowed.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is justified, and this court decides to approve the decision of the suspension of compulsory execution. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow