beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff was a creditor who was working for the Defendant Company with the Seoul Western District Court 2010Kadan25271 Decided the executory power over the claim amount. Based on the above judgment, the Plaintiff was issued a decision to seize and collect the claim amounting to KRW 130,000 (hereinafter “instant claim attachment and collection order”) with respect to the claim amount against the Defendant Company of the Defendant Company of the Defendant Company A as the Suwon District Court 2015 Sungnam Branch Branch 2011.
Pay that the debtor A receives every month from the defendant company, and the end-of-age allowance and retirement allowance that the debtor receives in June and December of each year: Provided, That it does not fall under the scope of prohibition of seizure under Article 246(1)4 of the Civil Execution Act and the Enforcement Decree of the Civil Execution Act.
B. On July 28, 2015, the seizure and collection order of the instant claim reaches the Defendant.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy,
2. The parties' assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff asserts that, since the monthly salary of the Defendant A is KRW 2.5 million, the Defendant asserts that the collection obligee is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff as part of the collection amount the remainder of KRW 22,200,000,000 (i.e., KRW 2.., KRW 2.5 million per month - KRW 1,500,000 per month - KRW 1,500,000 per month, 22 months x 22 months), excluding the amount subject to prohibition of seizure among monthly salary from July 31, 2015 to April 22, 2017. The Defendant asserts that, since the obligor’s monthly salary was reduced after July 31, 2015, the Defendant constitutes a claim for prohibition of seizure by receiving salary of KRW 118,00 per month and cannot comply with the Plaintiff’s claim.
B. The fact that Determination A received benefits of KRW 2.5 million per month before July 28, 2013 does not conflict between the parties.
However, according to the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the monthly wage of A is stated as KRW 1,350,000,000 in the documents related to benefits, such as the defendant company's benefit ledger and the income tax withholding receipt, and A is monthly in the bank account of B and C.