logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2021.02.04 2020가단2426
추심금
Text

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On August 23, 2019, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against C with this court against the Plaintiff for loans, and this court rendered a judgment that “C shall pay to the Plaintiff 10 million won and the amount equivalent to 5% per annum from June 17, 2016 to December 7, 2018, and 12% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.”

On January 14, 2021, C appealed with this Court No. 2019Na14936, but the appeal was dismissed.

B. The Plaintiff filed an application for a collection order for the seizure and seizure of the collateral against collateral security (hereinafter “mortgage”) with the obligor C and C as the Defendant on October 21, 2019, under the judgment of the court ordering a provisional execution of the above case 72361, the Plaintiff filed a claim with the Defendant for the seizure and collection order of collateral security (hereinafter “instant order”). On October 21, 2019, the court established the seizure and collection order for the collateral security (hereinafter “mortgage”) with the U.S. District Court rendered on September 21, 2019, with respect to the amount of 1475/153 square meters out of 5,216 square meters in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, U.S., E 1,553 square meters in size, F forest and 45,164 square meters in size, 17984,50912 square meters in forest and forest, which was received on September 20, 2019.

On October 23, 2019, the above seizure and collection order was served on the defendant.

(c)

On July 1, 2020, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against C on the ground that there was no obligation to avoid collateral security of the instant collateral security by the court at a 2020 Ghana 7698, and that C did not take any action against the instant case, and this court rendered a judgment of non-litigation citing the Defendant’s claim on September 22, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Eul evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings. 2. Judgment as to the plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was issued a seizure and collection order as to the instant collateral against the Defendant, which was held by the Defendant by the instant court No. 2019, 912, and as to the instant collateral against the Defendant, and thus, the Defendant should pay KRW 80 million to the Plaintiff.

The defendant is mutually different from C.

arrow