logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.02.03 2016가단89517
추심금
Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 30,266,723 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from August 25, 2016 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On April 23, 2009, the Seoul Western District Court Decision 2008Gahap14756 (hereinafter “Korea Business Start-up Support”) filed a lawsuit against Korea Business Start-up Support Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Korea Business Start-up Support”) and C, and rendered a favorable judgment (the judgment of this case that the Korea Business Start-up Support and C jointly pays to the Plaintiff KRW 300 million and damages for delay) against the said court, and the said judgment became final and conclusive.

B. On July 31, 2009, the Plaintiff filed an application for the seizure and collection order of the claim (hereinafter “the collection order of this case”) with the above court as the Seoul Southern District Court No. 2009TTTTB against the Defendant for the seizure and collection order of the claim against the Defendant in Korea’s business start-up support (the amount to KRW 300,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00

C. After receiving a notice of the instant collection and seizure order, the Defendant paid KRW 30,266,723 (hereinafter “the instant collection money”) to the business start-up support Korea from December 6, 2010 to December 9, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts above, the defendant, the third debtor of the collection and seizure order of this case, was delivered, and the defendant paid the amount of the claim of this case to the Korean business start-up support, which is the debtor, according to the validity of the seizure and collection order of this case after the above order was delivered. Thus, it cannot be asserted against the plaintiff, the execution creditor, and therefore, the plaintiff, who acquired the collection right of this case, shall be subject to the collection amount of this case.

arrow