logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2018.04.25 2018가단101522
구상금
Text

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 291,98,243 as well as KRW 86,55,150 as of January 20, 2005 to May 31, 2005.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant et al. seeking the payment of the amount of indemnity, etc. by Busan District Court 2005Gahap19814, which was sentenced on August 30, 2006, and the above judgment became final and conclusive as it is.

(hereinafter “the final judgment of this case”) A B E CD

B. According to the final judgment of this case, the balance of the claim (including finalized damages and substitute payments) that the Plaintiff is to receive from the Defendant is as follows based on December 8, 2017.

F G H I

C. The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit for the extension of extinctive prescription of claims according to the final judgment of the instant case.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry in Gap evidence 1 and 2

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 291,98,243 won and 86,55,150 won among them, with 18% interest per annum from January 20, 2005 to May 31, 2005, 15% per annum from June 1, 2005 to November 9, 2005, and 20% interest per annum from November 10, 2005 to complete payment (20% per annum from November 10, 2005) to 20% interest per annum from 193,096,031 won (=26,714,119 won, 105,630 won, 630 won, 61, 282 won) to 15% interest per annum from May 15, 2005 to 205.

B. As to this, the defendant's representative director C was subject to bankruptcy and exemption under the Changwon District Court Decision 2009Da1891, 2009Hadan1889, and thus, it cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim. However, the defendant's representative director, not the defendant's corporation, cannot oppose the plaintiff's claim on grounds of bankruptcy and exemption. Thus, the above dispute cannot be accepted.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow