(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2020.06.10 2017재머14

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) 서울동부지방법원 2020.06.10 2017재머14

대여금

Text

1. All of the lawsuits for quasi-deliberation of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of quasi-examination shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Quasi-Review Plaintiff).

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking the payment of loans under this Court Order 2016Da34039, which was the subject of quasi-examination. On the date of conciliation conducted on July 6, 2017, the following adjustment provisions were concluded on the date of conciliation conducted on July 6, 2017, and the content of the protocol was clearly recorded in the protocol of conciliation (the protocol of quasi-examination of this case).

prescribed provisions

1.(a)

The defendant shall pay 76 million won to the plaintiff in installments, which shall be paid in installments, 26 million won until July 31, 2017, 25 million won until August 31, 2017, and 25 million won until September 29, 2017, respectively. If the defendant delays the payment once, he/she shall immediately lose the benefit of time, and shall pay the remainder after deducting the amount paid after July 6, 2017 from the total amount of 76 million won and after deducting the amount paid after July 6, 2017, in addition, damages for delay shall be paid in addition at the rate of 15 percent per annum from the day following the date of loss of benefit of time to the day of full payment.

B. The plaintiff is against the defendant.

Upon receipt of all the money stated in the subsection, the Seoul East Eastern District Court 2016Kadan1797 shall withdraw provisional seizure against immovables and implement the procedure to cancel the execution.

2. The plaintiff waives the remaining claims.

3. The costs of lawsuit and the costs of mediation shall be borne by each person;

2. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff, due to the Defendant’s deception, was unable to obtain a legitimate certificate of borrowing KRW 120,00,000 for the entire loan due to the Defendant’s deception, and submitted a fake loan certificate to a court, thereby hindering the Plaintiff’s attack and causing the conciliation of the instant case.

This constitutes “when another person’s act subject to criminal punishment has obstructed the submission of the method of offence and defense that may affect judgment” under Article 451 subparag. 5 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. At the time of conciliation, the Plaintiff is due to the pressure and revolving of the mediators.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제451조 제5호

유사 판례

-청주지방법원 2017.11.16 2017재가단23

-대전지방법원홍성지원 2020.05.27 2019재가단30004

-청주지방법원 2017.08.24 2017재가단10013

-인천지방법원 2016.01.12 2015재가단59

-서울동부지방법원 2018.02.23 2017재가단48