logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2020.07.07 2020가단204691
집행문부여의 소
Text

1. An executory exemplification of the judgment in Seoul Western District Court 2013 Ghana47927 among the Defendant and D Co., Ltd.

Reasons

1. Judgment on the grounds of claim

A. According to the purport of Gap evidence No. 1-4 and the entire pleadings, Eul (hereinafter "foreign company") received a judgment from the above court on November 6, 2013 that "the defendant paid to the non-party company 13,768,81,263 won with 20% interest per annum from September 26, 2013 to the day of full payment" (hereinafter "the judgment of this case"). The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time, and the non-party company transferred the above claim to the plaintiff on February 27, 2019. However, it is recognized that the notice on the assignment of claims was not served on the defendant.

B. According to the above facts, the Plaintiff acquired the claim for the amount of money transferred from the non-party company after the judgment was rendered. Thus, the junior administrative officer, etc. of the Seoul Western District Court shall grant the execution clause to the Plaintiff for compulsory execution against the Defendant, on the instant judgment between the non-party company and the Defendant.

C. As to this, the defendant asserts that the non-party company renounced its claim for the amount of money taken over based on the judgment of this case and actually discharged the defendant.

However, in a lawsuit for grant of execution clause, the subject of examination is limited to the requirements for grant of execution clause, including the fulfillment of conditions and the fact of succession. Thus, it is not allowed for an obligor to assert in the lawsuit for objection under Article 44 of the Civil Execution Act the grounds for objection in the lawsuit for granting of execution clause (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Da93087, Apr. 13, 2012). The Defendant’s above assertion is without merit without further examination

2. Accordingly, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow