(영문) 의정부지방법원고양지원 2017.08.30 2017가단5351

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) 의정부지방법원고양지원 2017.08.30 2017가단5351

대여금

Text

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 78,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from April 15, 1998 to August 23, 2007.

Reasons

1. In full view of the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 as to the cause of the claim and all the arguments, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant for the loan claim against the defendant under Goyang-gu District Court 2007dan29068. The above court rendered judgment on September 13, 2007 that "the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 78 million won and interest rate of 5% per annum from April 15, 1998 to August 23, 2007, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment," and it can be acknowledged that the above judgment became final and conclusive on October 3, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as "prior judgment of this case"), and the defendant shall have an obligation to pay the plaintiff 78,000 won with interest rate of 15% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment, to the day of 205% per annum 25% per annum from August 15, 2007.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. As to this, the Defendant: (a) delegated the Defendant’s borrowing of funds from the Plaintiff amounting to KRW 30 million, not to KRW 78,000,000; and (b) delegated the Defendant with all matters concerning the above lending; and (c) the prior judgment of this case claimed that the Defendant could not respond to the Plaintiff’s claim of this case, since the procedure was conducted by public notice despite the method of contact with the Defendant; and (d) the Defendant could not respond

B. Since a final and conclusive favorable judgment has res judicata effect, the parties can not file a new suit on the basis of the same subject matter of lawsuit as the final and conclusive judgment, in principle, or in exceptional cases where there are special circumstances, such as interruption of prescription, a new suit

In such a case, the judgment of a new suit shall not conflict with the final and conclusive judgment in favor of the previous suit, so the court of the subsequent suit cannot re-examine whether all the requirements to assert the established right are satisfied.

Therefore, the defendant's action is transferred to the subsequent suit.

유사 판례

-서울서부지방법원 2019.06.21 2019가단4536

-서울동부지방법원 2018.06.28 2018가단1743

-의정부지방법원 2019.08.22 2019가단2704

-서울서부지방법원 2020.11.27 2020가단7838

-전주지방법원 2018.06.01 2017나13413