logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.05.23 2018가단5037386
양수금(시효연장)
Text

1. The Defendants jointly and severally against the Plaintiff KRW 296,802,179 and KRW 100,000 among them, from April 7, 2006.

Reasons

1. The following facts are found to have been acknowledged between the Plaintiff and the Defendant Korea Industrial Environment Corporation pursuant to Article 150 of the Civil Procedure Act, and the above Defendant’s confessions pursuant to Article 150 of the Civil Procedure Act, and may be acknowledged by considering the overall purport of the pleadings as a whole among the Plaintiff and the Defendant A.

The Korea Asset Management Corporation (Seoul Central District Court 2006Gahap6512) filed a lawsuit against the Defendants for the claim for the amount of money (Seoul Central District Court 2006Gahap6512) and sentenced on December 26, 2007 (hereinafter “the judgment of this case”) to the effect that “the Defendants jointly and severally paid to the Plaintiff KRW 1,439,128,245 and KRW 484,87,924 from April 7, 2006 to November 12, 2007 for the Defendant Korea Industrial Environment Corporation, the period from November 12, 2007, Defendant A paid 18% per annum until June 8, 2007, and 20% per annum from the following day to the date of full payment” (hereinafter “the judgment of this case”). The judgment became final and conclusive around February 20, 2008.

B. On September 18, 2012, the Korea Asset Management Corporation transferred the claims against the Defendants based on the instant judgment to the Plaintiff. Around March 15, 2017, the Korea Asset Management Corporation sent the content-certified mail, on behalf of the Korea Asset Management Corporation, notifying the said transfer, to Defendant Korea Industrial Environment Corporation, and to Defendant A on September 28, 2012, respectively.

On the other hand, each notice of transfer was submitted along with the judgment of the instant case and was sent to the Defendants, respectively.

(Defendant A was served by public notice in a state where his whereabouts are unknown).

The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit for the interruption of extinctive prescription against the claim based on the instant judgment.

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendants filed a partial claim against the plaintiff as to KRW 296,802,179 and KRW 100,000,00 among the claims recognized in the judgment of this case. The defendant Korean Industrial Environment Corporation from April 7, 2006.

arrow