logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2018.08.22 2017가단338337
청구이의
Text

1. The defendant's executory exemplification of the loan case No. 2010Kadan130978 against the plaintiff is the Busan District Court.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant resided in adjoining areas, and referred to as “the Plaintiff and the Defendant.” As the Plaintiff had a debt owed to the Defendant and failed to repay the debt, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff as Busan District Court 2010Kadan130978.

B. On June 16, 201, the above court sentenced B to the judgment stating that “A shall pay B 21 million won and interest thereon 5% per annum from April 8, 2011 to June 16, 2011, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment” (hereinafter “instant judgment”). The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

(hereinafter referred to as the "liability of the judgment of this case").

Then, between September 22, 201 and July 11, 2014, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant totaling KRW 10,550,000 as indicated in the table in the following 4.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry of Gap evidence 1-7 (including paper numbers), Eul's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. For the repayment of the Plaintiff’s judgment debt, the Defendant signed two previous accounts and agreed to pay 20,000 won for each month (50,000 won per previous account) to the Defendant’s management system, and agreed to appropriate this for the principal of the judgment debt.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant a total of KRW 10,550,000,000,000 for the instant judgment amounting to KRW 10,450,000.

B. The Plaintiff did not agree to cover the total amount paid by the Plaintiff to the principal of the judgment payment of this case, and the said amount should be first appropriated to the damages for delay according to the order of statutory appropriation for performance.

Even if there was an agreement to cover the principal, this agreement is a condition precedent under which the principal would have been repaid in full with the total amount of KRW 21,00,000,000, and the Plaintiff paid only part of the principal, so the said principal shall be the principal.

arrow