(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2019.11.13 2019가단235118

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2019.11.13 2019가단235118

부당이득금

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 75,225,80 for the Plaintiff and its related KRW 5% per annum from June 3, 2019 to June 17, 2019, and June 18, 2019.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Although the Defendant concluded a contract with the Plaintiff for construction work and completed it, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking indirect costs by Seoul Central District Court 2015Gahap56085 on the grounds of extension of the construction period, and rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on July 14, 2017.

On August 31, 2018, the Seoul High Court (Seoul High Court) rendered a judgment ordering the Plaintiff to pay KRW 493,700,000 to the Defendant and its delay damages.

(2017Na204498). Although the Plaintiff filed an appeal, the Supreme Court rendered a ruling of dismissal of the trial without delay, the above appellate judgment became final and conclusive on January 24, 2019.

B. D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) issued the order of seizure and collection on May 30, 2017, with respect to KRW 75,225,80, out of the above indirect expense claims against the Plaintiff, the Defendant as the obligor and the Plaintiff as the third obligor, and the Defendant as the third obligor, upon request of the Seoul Western District Court, issued the order of seizure and collection.

However, the above order of seizure and collection was served on July 26, 2017 on the defendant.

C. The Defendant received reimbursement of KRW 596,727,749, September 19, 2018, from the Plaintiff after the judgment of the said appellate court was rendered.

D) On April 25, 2019, the Seoul Eastern District Court issued a payment order against the Plaintiff to pay KRW 75,225,800 to D, and the said court issued a payment order to pay KRW 75,225,800 to D. Accordingly, the Plaintiff repaid the said money to D on June 3, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Where a seizure order has been issued against a claim to be determined, the payment to the garnishee is prohibited, and the disposal and receipt of the debtor's claim is prohibited. Accordingly, even if the garnishee has been paid to the debtor, it cannot be set up against the execution creditor and the execution creditor has the right to collect

유사 판례

-서울북부지방법원 2020.08.27 2020가단671

-서울서부지방법원 2020.11.06 2020가단279794

-부산지방법원동부지원 2017.04.11 2016가단205306

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2019.11.29 2019가단5324

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.04.17 2019가단5118374