logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.09.04 2018가단18397
청구이의의 소
Text

1. The Defendant’s payment order with executory power in the Seoul Central District Court No. 2016 tea21836 against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On November 27, 1997, C Union loaned D 20 million won at the Plaintiff’s joint and several sureties on November 24, 2000 on the repayment date, the agreement was 14% per annum, and interest for arrears at 22% per annum.

B. On September 30, 2005, the trustee in bankruptcy of the C Union lawfully transferred the above bonds to E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) and on May 10, 2006, E filed an application with D and the Plaintiff for a performance recommendation seeking payment of the principal amount of KRW 20 million and KRW 22% per annum from September 11, 1999 to June 13, 2006 (hereinafter “the instant performance recommendation”). It was finalized on July 8, 2006.

C. On May 10, 2016, the Defendant applied for the pertinent payment order seeking payment of the instant claim by this Court No. 2016 tea21836, and issued a payment order on May 19, 2016, and became final and conclusive on June 17, 2016.

(hereinafter referred to as "the instant payment order"). 【The grounds for recognition】 Each entry in Gap 1-3, the purport of the whole pleadings, and significant facts to this court.

2. The determination of performance recommendation or payment order on the cause of a claim does not take place even after the final and conclusive decision of performance recommendation or payment order has become final and conclusive, and thus, the restriction pursuant to the time limit of res judicata does not apply to a lawsuit seeking an objection to that claim. Therefore, in a lawsuit seeking an objection to that claim, the determination of performance recommendation or all claims stated in the payment order may be deliberated and determined. In such a case, the burden of proof on the existence or establishment of the claim shall be borne by the obligee, i.e

(See Supreme Court Decision 2006Da34190 Decided May 14, 2009 and Supreme Court Decision 2010Da12852 Decided June 24, 2010, etc.) According to the overall purport of the above facts and arguments, D borrowed KRW 20 million from C Partnership on November 27, 1997 with the payment period fixed on November 24, 200, but overdue interest from September 11, 199.

arrow