(영문) 수원지방법원안양지원 2020.08.14 2020가단146

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) 수원지방법원안양지원 2020.08.14 2020가단146

양수금

Text

1. Defendant D is entitled to KRW 40,000,000 for the Plaintiff within the scope of the property inherited from the deceased B (E).

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On July 14, 2010, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the network B seeking the payment of the acquisition amount under the Suwon District Court Ansan Branch 2010da4842. On the date of open conciliation on July 14, 2010, the following adjustment was concluded:

(hereinafter referred to as “instant conciliation provisions”) shall be the case’s conciliation provisions.

1. The net B shall pay 100 million won to the Plaintiff by December 31, 2010. If the net B delays the payment of the said amount, the unpaid amount shall be paid in addition to the damages for delay at the rate of 20% per annum from January 1, 2011 to the date of full payment.

2. The plaintiff waives the remaining claims.

3. The costs of lawsuit and the costs of mediation shall be borne by each person;

B. On January 8, 2020, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the deceased B for an extension of the prescription period of the claim established under the instant conciliation protocol, and thereafter, the deceased on January 30, 2020. The Defendants, the legal inheritor of the deceased B, as the Seoul Family Court 2020-Ma2523 on April 27, 2020, reported the renunciation of inheritance as to the deceased B’s inheritance, and the Defendant D reported the refusal of inheritance as to the deceased B’s inheritance, and was tried on May 22, 2020 by the above court for a refusal of inheritance, acceptance, and acceptance of the inheritance succession.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, records and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the defense prior to the merits

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion by the Defendants filed a lawsuit of this case with the same content in spite of the instant protocol of mediation. Thus, the instant lawsuit is unlawful as there is no benefit of protection of rights.

B. Since a judgment in favor of the party in favor of which the relevant legal doctrine became final and conclusive has res judicata effect, where a party who received a final and conclusive judgment in favor of the said party files a lawsuit against the other party in favor of the former party to the lawsuit identical to that of the final and conclusive judgment in favor of the former party, barr

However, it is exceptionally a claim by a final judgment.

유사 판례

-창원지방법원 통영지원 2021.02.17 2020가단2112 (1)

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.04.11 2017가단5160692

-서울남부지방법원 2019.05.17 2019가단566

-창원지방법원 2021.02.05 2020나54606

-대구지방법원 2019.10.31 2019가합1088