beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the first instance court, the part between the plaintiff A and the defendant shall be modified as follows:
Plaintiff
A. The defendant of A.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court on this part of the basic facts is as stated in Paragraph 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the case where it is stated in Section 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance as " March 24, 2008" and " June 4, 2009" in Section 7 as " December 10, 208", and as it is stated in Section 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance, it is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Judgment on the defendant's main defense
A. The defendant's assertion that as to the plaintiff's claim for construction price against the defendant of the plaintiff A, 98,038,356 won, 124,70,274 won, CE, 147,080,547, CI received each claim attachment and collection order, 369,819,177 out of the main claim against the defendant of the plaintiff A (=98,038,356 won), 124,70,274 won, 147,547 won, i.e., the plaintiff's primary claim against the defendant of the plaintiff A (the plaintiff's claim for construction price) is unlawful by losing the standing to institute a performance suit.
B. Determination 1) Where a seizure and collection order has been issued on a claim, only the creditor may file a lawsuit for performance against the third debtor, and the debtor loses the eligibility to file a lawsuit for performance on the claim subject to seizure (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da70067, Aug. 19, 2010). An order for seizure of a claim takes effect upon delivery to the third debtor (Article 227(3) of the Civil Execution Act). Since the effect of seizure of a claim is limited to a subordinate right, it naturally extends to the interest or delay damages incurred after the seizure takes effect, but it does not extend to the interest or delay damages incurred before such effect (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Da1587, May 28, 2015). In full view of the following items: (a) A’s evidence No. 222-1, 2, 3, 44 through 47-15, 2015 and 315 of the construction consideration of the claims and 2001.5.