beta
Text
1. The defendant's decision is based on Seoul Eastern District Court Decision 2007Gadan43246 decided Oct. 11, 2007.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On October 11, 2007, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against C and the Plaintiff for a loan claim with Seoul Eastern District Court Decision 2007Kadan43246, and received a favorable judgment from the above court that “C and the Plaintiff jointly and severally pay to the Defendant the amount of KRW 40,000,000 and the amount of KRW 25% per annum from April 23, 1997 to August 7, 2007, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.” The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.
(hereinafter referred to as the “instant judgment”). (b)
On May 12, 2011, the Plaintiff repaid the Defendant KRW 10,000,000.
C. On September 23, 2014, on the basis of the executory exemplification of the instant judgment, the Defendant received a seizure and collection order against the Plaintiff’s national bank, new bank, Korea Bank, Korea Bank, Han Bank, Han Bank, Nonghyup Bank, Industrial Bank of Korea, Korea Exchange Bank, Korea Exchange Bank, Korea Exchange Bank, Korea C&T Bank, Korea C&T Bank, and deposit claims against the Republic of Korea.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is the cause of the instant claim, and the Plaintiff was exempted from the Defendant’s remainder of debt, excluding KRW 10,000,000, out of the amount of debt pursuant to the instant judgment, and thus, the enforcement based on the instant judgment should be dismissed.
B. In light of the above facts, if the plaintiff added the purport of the entire pleadings to the statement in Gap evidence No. 2, it is acknowledged that the defendant prepared and delivered a document stating that "A and the plaintiff's debt 10,000,000 won shall be terminated to 10,000,000 won, among the plaintiff's debt 20,000 won, until May 12, 2011, the defendant shall not make any further demand for the plaintiff's debt," and according to the above facts of recognition, the defendant prepared and delivered a document to the plaintiff around May 12, 200 from the plaintiff to the plaintiff.