1. The Defendant’s compulsory execution against the Plaintiff by the Seoul Western District Court Decision 2010Gahap7287 Decided March 11, 201 is three.

Basic Facts

The Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff with this Court 2010Gahap7287, and this Court rendered a judgment on March 31, 201 that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant 150 million won and 20% interest per annum from July 3, 2010 to the day of full payment.”

Therefore, although the Plaintiff appealed, on August 17, 201, the said judgment became final and conclusive after withdrawing an appeal.

(hereinafter “The instant final and conclusive judgment”). The Plaintiff repaid to the Defendant the sum of KRW 185 million (hereinafter “the instant money”) totaling KRW 185 million on October 7, 201 and KRW 85 million on October 28, 201 as the principal and interest of the instant final and conclusive judgment (hereinafter “instant final and conclusive judgment”).

[Ground of recognition] The plaintiff asserts that compulsory execution by the above judgment of the defendant should be dismissed, since there is no dispute, the plaintiff's judgment as to the grounds for claim of judgment as to Gap's evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the grounds for claim of judgment as to the purport of whole argument.

As seen earlier, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant the instant monetary amount after the final and conclusive judgment was rendered, barring any special circumstance, and barring any special circumstance, the Plaintiff is only obligated to pay the Defendant the remainder after deducting the instant monetary amount from the principal and interest of the final and conclusive judgment.

Therefore, compulsory execution based on the final judgment of this case shall not be permitted only for the portion repaid with the money of this case.

The defendant's assertion on the existence of an invalid agreement was that the plaintiff would give the defendant an additional interest rate of 4 to 5% immediately after the repayment of the money in this case, and that the plaintiff again asked the defendant to return the money, which is not paid part of the above money.

Accordingly, from October 10, 201 to July 30, 2012, the Defendant returned KRW 19.5 million in total to the Plaintiff by either directly paying the amount or repaying the Plaintiff’s debt on behalf of the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff and the Defendant repaid the Plaintiff within the said amount.