(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.12.09 2015가단55791

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.12.09 2015가단55791

청구이의

Text

1. The Defendant’s determination of the Seoul Central District Court’s amount of litigation cost No. 2014Kao2717, August 12, 2014.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On November 7, 2013, the Defendant and the non-party Mine City Development Corporation filed a suit of objection against the Plaintiff as Seoul Central District Court 2013Gahap30856, and the court rendered a ruling that “The Plaintiff’s Defendant and the non-party Gwangju City Development Corporation shall be disqualified from compulsory execution based on the promissory note No. 712 of the 2007 Deed No. 712 of the 2007 Deed No. 712 of the 2007 Deed,” and the Plaintiff appealed against the above ruling and filed an appeal with Seoul High Court 2013Na209255, May 23, 2014, the said ruling became final and conclusive on November 28, 2013 as the withdrawal of appeal.

B. The Defendant confirmed that the amount of the litigation cost to be repaid to the Defendant was KRW 4,500,202 by the Seoul Central District Court on August 12, 2014, via the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2014Kao2717, which became final and conclusive as to the Plaintiff.

C. On March 6, 2015, C transferred KRW 15,00,000, out of the loan claims based on the ruling of the Suwon District Court 2014Gahap6926 Decided February 5, 2015, which C had against the Defendant, to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff, on behalf of C, notified the Defendant on March 19, 2015.

The Defendant appealed against the foregoing Suwon District Court Decision 2014Gahap6926 Decided October 27, 2015, and the Seoul High Court rendered a judgment to the effect that “the Defendant would pay to C the amount of KRW 160,000,000,000, deducting KRW 15,000,000 from the total amount of the loan and the amount of the indemnity from KRW 175,00,000, and damages for delay.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, since the Plaintiff’s obligation to the Defendant based on the determination of the amount of litigation costs of this case has ceased to exist as the Plaintiff’s declaration of offset will, the enforcement of the Defendant’s obligation based on the said determination

3. The plaintiff's claim of this case is justified, and this is accepted.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.05.12 2019가단5190901

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.02.17 2016가단5117684

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.05.12 2016가단89388

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.08.13 2015가단35551

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.12.02 2015가합23425