logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원통영지원거제시법원 2019.03.21 2018가단40
청구이의
Text

1. The defendant's forced mobilization of the defendant's plaintiff to the plaintiff according to this court's conciliation protocol (No. 2010 Ghana1253).

Reasons

1. In fact, the conciliation was concluded on December 2, 2010 in this Court No. 2010 Ghana 12553, which the Defendant raised against the Plaintiff on December 2, 2010.

The Plaintiff paid KRW 14,400,000 to the Defendant.

On April 5, 2011, pursuant to the above conciliation protocol, the Defendant applied for the attachment and assignment order of claim No. 2011TTTY 201TY 15,137,137, including the above conciliation amount and interest thereon, as the claimed amount, and received the decision on April 14, 201.

The decision was confirmed around that time, and was served on April 28, 201 on the third debtor non-party C.

[Ground of recognition] Article 231 of the Civil Execution Act provides that "if an assignment order is confirmed, the assignment order shall be deemed to have been discharged by the obligor when the assignment order was served on the garnishee."

The attachment and assignment order based on the above conciliation protocol becomes final and conclusive, and the obligation of the plaintiff against the defendant stated in the above conciliation protocol was delivered to the third debtor, and the obligation of the plaintiff against the defendant was extinguished as the settlement order.

Thus, compulsory execution under the above protocol is no longer permitted, so the plaintiff's claim seeking the exclusion of executory power of the protocol of mediation is justified.

arrow