logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2018.05.10 2017가합741
청구이의
Text

1. On November 18, 2016, the Jeonju District Court Decision 2016Gahap577 (Mains) and 2016Gahap2887 (Counterclaim) against the Defendant’s Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The instant judgment: (a) the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff with the Jeonju District Court 2016Gahap577 (principal lawsuit) and 2016Gahap2887 (Counterclaim) (hereinafter “instant judgment”); (b) on November 18, 2016, the said court rendered a judgment ordering the Plaintiff to pay KRW 221,973,450 and the amount calculated by the rate of 15% per annum from August 26, 2016 to the date of full payment (hereinafter “instant judgment claim”); and (c) the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

B. As to the amount of KRW 237,042,00 out of the judgment amount in the instant case against the Defendant, the Jeonju District Court 2013Gahap9085 was the judgment amounting to KRW 237,042,00,00 against the Defendant as the execution bond, Jeonju District Court 2017TBL468 applied for the seizure and assignment order of claim against the Defendant.

On January 20, 2017, the lower court rendered a decision accepting the foregoing claim (hereinafter “instant assignment order”) and the instant assignment order reached the Plaintiff on January 25, 2017.

As to this, the Defendant filed an immediate appeal with the Jeonju District Court 2014Ra60, but the assignment order of this case was dismissed on November 24, 2017, which became final and conclusive on December 6, 2017.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including branch numbers in case of additional number), Eul evidence Nos. 3 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. 1) The Plaintiff’s claim that the Defendant asserted against the Plaintiff was transferred to Nari Industrial Development Co., Ltd. as an assignment order of this case, and thus, a compulsory execution based on the judgment of this case against the Plaintiff should be denied. 2) The Defendant’s claim for the judgment on the loans against the Defendant against Nari Industrial Development Co., Ltd. is the Jeonju District Court 2013Gahap9085, Jeonju District Court 2014 Tari-576, Jeonju District Court 2014 Tari-576, and the assignment order of the claims against Nari Industrial Development Co.

arrow