logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원안산지원 2019.01.31 2016가합8999
약정금
Text

1. The instant lawsuit was concluded on November 19, 2018 as the withdrawal of the lawsuit.

2. The plaintiff's successor's motion to participate in the succession.

Reasons

1. Declaration of termination of the lawsuit;

A. On November 19, 2018, the Plaintiff submitted a written withdrawal of the instant lawsuit to withdraw the entire lawsuit. On the same day, the Defendant agreed to the withdrawal of the lawsuit by stating the intent of consent along with the above written withdrawal.

Accordingly, the lawsuit of this case has the effect of withdrawal of lawsuit.

B. The Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor asserts that the Plaintiff received the claim of KRW 4,233,00,000 against the Defendant (the Plaintiff’s claim of KRW 4,233,000 payable to the Defendant out of the transfer price of KRW 5,000,23,000, which was transferred by the Plaintiff to the Defendant for construction of 2,156 households on the ground of 34,813 square meters of public rental apartment on the ground of 22,156 square meters of the 34,813 square meters of the 34,003 square meters of the 34,003 square meters of the 5,000,000 transfer price, and the Plaintiff filed a claim for performance through the instant lawsuit) from the Suwon District Court as to the Plaintiff’s claim of KRW 2018,117

However, even if the plaintiff loses the ability to collect the claim due to the seizure and collection order and there is no standing to be a party to the performance lawsuit, the plaintiff who filed the lawsuit does not lose the right to withdraw the lawsuit.

The above assertion by the plaintiff succeeding intervenor is rejected.

C. The instant lawsuit declares that its withdrawal was terminated on November 19, 2018.

2. Whether the participation by the plaintiff in succession is legitimate

A. The plaintiff succeeding intervenor, 1.B.

As stated in the foregoing paragraph, the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff received a seizure and collection order, and the Defendant asserted to the effect that the said obligation should be repaid to the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff, who is the claimant for the collection, and submitted an application for intervention in succession to the instant court on November 20, 2018.

(b) Any third person who has succeeded to the whole or part of the right or obligation which is the object of lawsuit, while the lawsuit is pending before the court, may request a succession intervention to the court in which such lawsuit

(Articles 81 and 79 of the Civil Procedure Act).

arrow