beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s second sale balance case against the Plaintiff, which is the court of Yangyang-gun branch of the Chuncheon District Court, 2017.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On January 19, 2017, the Defendant issued a payment order against the Plaintiff, stating that “the Plaintiff shall pay KRW 30,000,000 per annum to the Defendant, calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from the day following the delivery date of the original copy of the instant payment order, and KRW 157,600 per annum to the day of full payment.” The above payment order was served on the Plaintiff on January 24, 2017, and became final and conclusive on February 8, 2017.
(hereinafter referred to as the “instant payment order”), which became final and conclusive, B.
In order to recover the principal and interest recognized in the instant payment order, the Defendant applied for a compulsory auction of real estate (hereinafter referred to as “instant compulsory auction”) to Chuncheon District Court Branch C for the real estate owned by the Plaintiff and rendered a decision to commence the auction on March 31, 2017.
C. On June 9, 2017, the Plaintiff: (a) designated the Defendant as the principal and paid the total of KRW 31,676,712 [the principal = KRW 1,676,712 (i.e., KRW 30,000,000 x 15% per annum x 15% per annum x 15% from January 25, 2017 to June 9, 2017) and the procedure for demanding payment [the sum of KRW 31,834,60,00 in total (= KRW 31,676,7127,60,60)]; and (b) deposit the total amount of KRW 157,60 in the instant payment order, from January 25, 2017 to June 9, 2017.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings
2. The plaintiff asserts that the compulsory execution based on the payment order of this case should be dismissed, since the principal and interest recognized in the payment order of this case and the cost of demanding procedure are deposited in full.
On the other hand, the defendant asserts to the effect that since he did not receive KRW 1,215,500, the execution cost incurred in relation to the compulsory auction of this case, all of the enforcement power of the payment order of this case cannot be ruled out.
3. Determination is made pursuant to Article 53(1) of the Civil Execution Act.