beta
Text
1. The defendant's decision on August 23, 2017 against the plaintiff is based on the Supreme Court Decision 2017Na557 (principal lawsuit) and 2017Na564 (Counterclaim).
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. In this court’s claim for unjust enrichment against the Plaintiff, the above court rendered a final and conclusive judgment on August 23, 2017: “The Plaintiff paid 9,749,355 won to the Defendant, and 9,56,189 won among them, 5% per annum from July 14, 2015 to January 11, 2017; 15% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment; 183,16 won per annum from July 14, 2015 to August 23, 2017; and 5% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment; and 183,16 won to the day of full payment; and 15% per annum from the next day to August 23, 2017 to the day of full payment.”
B. On February 7, 2018, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 12,037,569 (12,037,569) from the Daegu District Court in order to repay the above judgment amount to the Defendant, and transferred KRW 1,800 to the Defendant’s account on August 13, 2018.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1, 3 through 5, and the purport of whole pleading
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts, KRW 12,037,569, the Plaintiff’s debt owed to the Defendant for final and conclusive judgment, was appropriated for KRW 2,289,874 in total as interest and delay damages until February 7, 2018, and KRW 9,747,69 in principal and KRW 1,660 in total, and the remainder of KRW 1,660 in principal and KRW 128 in delay damages from February 8, 2018 to August 13, 2018, were fully repaid and extinguished.
B. As to this, the defendant's assertion that the defendant cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim since he was sentenced to the above judgment of a lower amount than the defendant's claim as a result of an error in calculation at the time of the above claim, the defendant's argument that the defendant cannot accept the plaintiff's claim. Thus, the above repayment effect of the final judgment amount cannot be denied. Thus, the defendant's argument is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition by admitting it.