logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원포항지원 2017.09.22 2016가합10396
청구이의
Text

1. The Defendant’s compulsory execution against the Plaintiff at the Daegu District Court Branch Branch of the Daegu District Court was conducted based on the payment order.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant asserted that “the Plaintiff shall lend KRW 300 million to the Defendant with business funds to the extent of one month and complete payment,” and the Defendant shall transfer the funds to the cash and passbook around May 19, 201,” and filed an application for payment order against the Plaintiff at the Daegu District Court Port Branch, 2011, which sought the payment of the above loan KRW 300 million and the delayed payment damages.

B. On September 20, 201, the above court issued a payment order stating that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant the amount of KRW 300,000,000,000 calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from the day following the day of service of the payment order to the day of full payment (hereinafter “instant payment order”). The Plaintiff did not raise an objection despite being served on October 4, 201, and the instant payment order became final and conclusive on October 19, 2011.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff lent KRW 80 million to the Plaintiff around September 2009, KRW 100 million around July 201, KRW 2011, KRW 100 million on May 20, 201, KRW 100 million on May 30, 201, and KRW 6 million on June 3, 201.

However, since the Plaintiff did not repay this, the Plaintiff applied for the instant payment order by indicating only KRW 300 million out of the total amount of each of the above loans of KRW 386 million as the loan as the cause of the claim.

B. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff, like the cause of the claim for the instant payment order, did not borrow KRW 300 million from the Defendant around May 19, 201, and therefore, compulsory execution based on the instant payment order should be denied. (2) However, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 80 million from the Defendant around September 2009, and KRW 70 million around July 201, and the Dong enterprise consisting of the Plaintiff, C, and D received KRW 100 million from the Defendant on May 20, 201, and KRW 100 million from the Defendant on May 30, 201, and KRW 600,000 from June 3, 2011. The said C returned the above investment order to the Defendant, and the Defendant returned the payment order to the Defendant on June 3, 201.

arrow