logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.05.14 2017나75110
양수금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. As of March 31, 2005, the Defendant used or received a credit card from the financial institutions (hereinafter “the instant financial institutions”) as indicated below, and did not repay the credit card use price or loan equivalent to the amount indicated below (hereinafter “the instant credit card use price and loan”) as of March 31, 2005.

on April 8, 2002.4. 1,255,130 Samsung Card Co., Ltd. 330,391,320 Korean Credit Card Co., Ltd. 11,256,638 KB-dong 16 credit card 3,742,996 KB-dong 16, May 17, 2002. 1,50 KB-dong 16 Card No. 16, Jul. 8, 2002. 1,00,000 KB-dong 16 Card No. 16, 1,000,000 KB-dong 16 Card No. 16530, Aug. 13, 2002;

B. The financial institutions of this case transferred each of the above claims to the Plaintiff on May 13, 2005, and notified the Defendant of the assignment of each of the above claims on May 16, 2005.

C. The Plaintiff, as the assignee of the instant loan claim, filed an order for payment with the Defendant as the Seogu District Court Branch Branch Branch of the Daegu District Court (Seoul District Court Branch Branch of 2007Hu408, May 2, 2007, the Plaintiff received the payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) stating that “the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 43,243,626 and KRW 23,313,164 with the interest of KRW 17% per annum from April 24, 2007 to the date of full payment” (hereinafter “the instant payment order”). The instant payment order was served on the Defendant on June 21, 2007, and was finalized on July 6, 2007.

【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 7, the purport of whole pleadings

2. The Defendant’s judgment on the instant safety defense was not notified that the instant financial institution had transferred the instant loan claim to the Plaintiff, and thus, the instant lawsuit filed by the Plaintiff, which cannot be asserted against the obligor, shall be eligible to be a party.

arrow