(영문) 대전지방법원 2015.02.12 2014가단216123

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) 대전지방법원 2015.02.12 2014가단216123

청구이의

Text

1. The Defendant’s respective cases against the Plaintiff are Daejeon District Court Decision 2013 Ghana 110253, 2013 Family Court Decision 110246, 2013 Family Court Decision 20260.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the lawsuit claiming objection

A. 1) The defendant filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff and the non-party C with the Daejeon District Court 2013da10253 and 2013dada110246 on December 9, 2013. "The plaintiff and C shall jointly and severally pay to the defendant 2 million won and 36% interest per annum from February 5, 200 to the date of full payment," and "the plaintiff and C shall jointly and severally pay to the defendant 2 million won and 36% interest per annum from February 14, 2001 to the date of full payment," each of the above decisions of performance recommendation became final and conclusive on December 27, 2013, and the defendant filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff 200 million won and 36% interest per annum from February 14, 2001 to the date of full payment, and the above decision of performance recommendation was made on December 27, 2013 to the defendant 2013.

3) On May 26, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a request for auction on the basis of each of the above recommendations, and repaid KRW 27,500,350,000 to the Defendant on June 4, 2014. On July 9, 2014, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 27,50,350, including all the remainder of the principal and interest and enforcement costs based on each of the above recommendations for performance recommendation. [Grounds for Recognition] The Plaintiff did not dispute with the Defendant; Party A’s evidence 1 through 5 (including the serial number, each of the entries, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

B. According to the above facts of recognition, all of the Plaintiff’s debt based on each of the above recommendations made against the Defendant was extinguished.

Therefore, it is reasonable that the defendant's compulsory execution based on the above decision of execution recommendation against the plaintiff should be rejected.

2. Determination as to the claim for return of unjust enrichment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion against the Defendant around March 11, 2013, is about KRW 6 million in total to the Defendant.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2019.03.26 2018가단26358

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.11.26 2019가단5076555

-대전지방법원천안지원 2015.06.09 2015가단3521

-인천지방법원 2018.10.25 2018가단8155

-부산지방법원서부지원 2020.01.15 2019가단103018