beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 51,251,506 as well as KRW 51,00,000 from June 15, 2019 to July 12, 2019.
Reasons
1. There is no dispute between the parties to the judgment as to the cause of the claim, or in full view of the purport of the entries and arguments in Gap's evidence Nos. 1 and 10, the creditor among the facts stated in the attached Form No. 1 to 10, shall be considered as "the plaintiff
There is no evidence against this, and there is no evidence against this.
According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 51,251,506 won (i.e., total amount of KRW 51,00,000,000 from May 16, 2019 to June 14, 2019) and damages for delay calculated at each rate of 12% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, from the following day to the day of full payment, with respect to KRW 51,00,000, which is the day when the original copy of the instant payment order was served on the Defendant from June 15, 2019 to the day when the original copy of the instant payment order was served on the Defendant.
2. The defendant's assertion argues that since the defendant applied for individual rehabilitation to the Ulsan District Court, the plaintiff cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim.
Comprehensively taking account of the respective descriptions and the purport of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the Defendant filed an application for individual rehabilitation with the Ulsan District Court 2019 Session 10532 on June 10, 2019, but it can be acknowledged that the decision to commence individual rehabilitation procedures was not made until the closing date of the argument in the instant case.
Where an action is already filed with respect to individual rehabilitation claims prior to a decision to commence individual rehabilitation procedures, litigation therefor may be conducted (see, e.g., the proviso to Article 600(1)3 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act and the Supreme Court Decision 2013Da42878, Sept. 12, 2013). Even if this decision is rendered, the Defendant cannot be deemed to have any disadvantage in preparing and obtaining a draft repayment plan in the individual rehabilitation procedures.
Therefore, the defendant's argument cannot be accepted.
3. The plaintiff's claim is justified.