beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 19,305,835 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from April 23, 2016 to the date of complete payment.
Reasons
1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, 7, and 8:
On June 5, 2012, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking a loan, etc. with the Incheon District Court 2012Gahap95355, which had been pending in the said lawsuit. On August 14, 2013, the said court rendered a ruling of recommending reconciliation with the purport that “B shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 150,000,000 by September 13, 2013. If B does not pay the said amount by the payment date, the Plaintiff shall pay the unpaid amount plus damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from the day following the said payment date to the day of full payment (hereinafter “decision of recommending reconciliation”). The decision of recommending reconciliation of this case became final and conclusive around that time.
B. After that, on January 6, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for a seizure and collection order with respect to the creditor, debtor, new bank and defendant, Defendant, claim amounting to KRW 218,934,426 ( KRW 100,000 for new bank, Defendant: KRW 118,934,426 for a new bank, Defendant: KRW 118,934,426 for a new bank, and deposit claim against Defendant (excluding deposits of KRW 1500,000 for each individual) with the Incheon District Court 2016T. On January 8, 2016, the court issued a seizure and collection order (hereinafter “instant seizure and collection order”). The instant seizure and collection order reached the Defendant on December 12, 2016.
C. Meanwhile, as of January 12, 2016, B served on the Defendant a collection order of the instant seizure and collection, the Defendant had a deposit claim of KRW 20,805,835 [Account Number:C) [Account Number] 20,739,786 KRW 66,049] in total with respect to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant deposit claim”).
2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of claim, the defendant's deposit claim of this case to the plaintiff on 20,805.