beta
Text
1. Defendant Hyundai Savings Bank: KRW 35,755,543, respectively, to Plaintiff A, B, C, and D; KRW 53,633,315, respectively, and KRW 53,635.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On June 23, 201, the netF received a payment order ordering the payment of money calculated at the rate of 9% per annum from April 14, 2010 to April 14, 2010 (hereinafter “instant payment order”) with respect to KRW 4,00,000,000 and KRW 3,000,000 among them as loans owed by the obligor to the Daejeon District Court Branch Branch of Daejeon District Court as the obligor, and from KRW 3,00,000,000,000, the above payment order was finalized on July 30, 201.
B. After that, on the basis of the executory order issued on July 17, 2013, the deceased F shall have the third debtor under the executory order issued on July 17, 2013, the claim amounting to the Republic of Korea; the claim amounting to 4,879,534,246 won (the principal amounting to 4,00,000,000 won and 3,000,000,000 won and 6% per annum from April 14, 2010 to July 15, 2013; the interest or delay damages calculated at the rate of 586,356,164,164, 1,000,000,000 won and the replacement resource creation expenses were refunded to the third debtor at the annual rate of 9,385,000 won or less (the replacement resource creation expenses were refunded to the claim and delay damages amounting to 9,395,000 won).
C. On September 11, 2013, the deceased F applied for the correction of the instant seizure and collection order under the Daejeon District Court Branch Branch Decision 2013Kaga772, and on September 24, 2013, the ruling of correction was issued that the garnishee of the instant seizure and collection order should be corrected in the Republic of Korea to the astronomical City.
On the other hand, the deceased on September 17, 2013, and the deceased F was deceased on September 17, 2013, and there was Plaintiff A, B, C, and D, who is the deceased’s spouse, and the deceased’s heir. However, the Plaintiffs, who were the above inheritors, agreed on the division of inherited property with the purport that Plaintiff A would solely inherit the collection claim based on the instant seizure and collection order on November 25, 2013.
(e)The time of astronomical concurrences with seizure.