(영문) 대전지방법원천안지원 2015.07.22 2015가단2191

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) 대전지방법원천안지원 2015.07.22 2015가단2191

물품대금

Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Around 2012, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the payment of semiconductor goods, etc., and the said lawsuit was concluded on December 6, 2012.

(2012da18683). Any conciliation clause established at the time shall be as follows:

1. The Defendant shall pay KRW 86 million to the Plaintiff; among them, the amount of KRW 30 million shall be paid up to April 30, 2013, and the remainder of KRW 56 million shall be paid up to September 2, 2013. If the Defendant fails to pay KRW 30 million up to April 30, 2013, the Defendant shall immediately lose the benefit of time, and if the Defendant fails to pay the said KRW 30 million up to April 30, 2013, the amount calculated at the rate of KRW 20% per annum from May 1, 2013 to the date of full payment.

2. If the Defendant paid the above KRW 36 million up to April 30, 2013, but fails to pay the remainder of KRW 56 million up to September 2, 2013, the amount calculated by adding the amount calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from September 3, 2013 to the date of full payment shall be paid.

3. The plaintiff waives the remaining claims.

4. The costs of lawsuit and the costs of mediation shall be borne by each person;

[Ground for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's No. 1 certificate, the purport of the whole pleading

2. The plaintiff alleged that the plaintiff filed a claim for performance following the above conciliation with the defendant, but the defendant did not pay only KRW 33,733,540 among them, and did not pay the remainder of KRW 52,266,460.

The plaintiff intended to enforce compulsory execution against the defendant's property pursuant to the above protocol, and the complaint attached to the protocol does not contain the defendant's resident registration address or resident registration number, and it is not mandatory execution is not underway because it is difficult to prove the identity of the defendant and the property owner as stated in the protocol

Accordingly, by filing the lawsuit of this case, the price of semiconductor goods, etc. is again sought.

3. Since a final and conclusive judgment in favor of the party has res judicata effect, the party is based on the same subject matter of lawsuit as the final and conclusive judgment.

유사 판례

-전주지방법원 2017.09.15 2016가단30861

-서울동부지방법원 2020.05.07 2019가단17097

-서울서부지방법원 2015.08.26 2015가단17398

-제주지방법원 2017.11.29 2017나10961

-창원지방법원마산지원 2019.01.22 2018가단105043