beta
Text
1. Defendant D’s KRW 7,820,00 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from July 6, 2017 to December 22, 2017.
Reasons
Basic Facts
A. On December 27, 2011, the Plaintiff: (a) obtained a decision to provisionally attach an amount equivalent to KRW 40,000,000 of the claim amount among the claim for construction price against the Defendants in E as the right to be preserved; (b) the instant provisional attachment was sent to the Defendants on December 29, 2011, respectively.
B. On March 14, 2014, the Plaintiff was sentenced to the judgment stating that “E shall pay to the Plaintiff 40 million won with interest of 20% per annum from September 1, 2013 to the date of full payment (hereinafter “instant judgment”).” (The Jeju District Court Decision 2013Da7522, hereinafter “instant judgment”).
C. On April 16, 2014, the Plaintiff received a collection order for the seizure and collection (the Jeju District Court 2014TTT2237; hereinafter “instant collection order”) with the content that the amount of the claim was KRW 40,000,000,000, from which the provisional seizure of this case was transferred to the original seizure. The instant collection order was served to the Defendants around that time.
Around June 201, Defendant B entered into a new construction project contract with E in KRW 85,00,000 for the construction cost. Defendant C entered into a new construction project contract with E on July 23, 2011 for KRW 128,000,000 for the construction cost, and Defendant D entered into a new construction project contract with E and H in KRW 150,000 for the construction cost around 201.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1, and Eul evidence Nos. 1, the plaintiff alleged to the purport of the whole pleadings, according to the collection order of this case, the plaintiff is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the collection amount of KRW 15,00,000,000, the collection amount of KRW 15,000,000, the collection amount of KRW 10,000,000, and the delay damages for this amount of KRW 7,820,000 after the provisional seizure of this case. At least the defendant D is obligated to pay the plaintiff the collection amount of KRW 7,820,00
The defendants asserts that E has no obligation to pay the construction cost to E because it has failed to complete the construction work under the construction contract.
Judgment
Defendant B and C.