(영문) 수원지방법원 여주지원 2018.03.20 2017가단5367

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) 수원지방법원 여주지원 2018.03.20 2017가단5367

청구이의

Text

1. The defendant's venture branch of Suwon District Court 2009Kadan4208 against the plaintiff has the executive force of the usage fee case.

Reasons

Facts of recognition

On December 17, 2009, the Suwon District Court rendered a ruling of recommending reconciliation that "A (the plaintiff of this case) shall pay 4,604,000 won to B (the defendant of this case) and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from April 25, 2009 to the date of full payment (hereinafter "decision of recommending reconciliation of this case")" between the plaintiff and the defendant, and the decision was finalized around that time.

The Defendant asserted that the principal and interest of the claim based on the decision of recommending reconciliation of this case is KRW 12,160,927, and filed an application for the seizure and collection order of the Plaintiff’s claim as stated in the Plaintiff’s attached list (hereinafter “the claim of this case”) (the above court 2917TTT 569 case), and the above court rendered a ruling of the seizure and collection order of the claim as of February 28, 2017.

On April 17, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 12,160,927 to the Defendant.

(Reasons for Recognition) Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1, 2, and 4 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings.

Judgment

When calculating the principal and interest of the Plaintiff’s obligation to the Defendant as of April 17, 2017 according to the decision on the recommendation for reconciliation in the instant case, the total amount of KRW 11,955,264 [the principal = interest of KRW 4,604,00: (i) 7,351,264 won (=4,604,000 + 20% x 20% x 365 days)].

However, on April 17, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 12,160,927 in excess of the above principal and interest to the Defendant is identical as seen earlier. As such, the Plaintiff’s obligation to the Defendant following the decision on the recommendation for reconciliation of this case was extinguished due to the said repayment.

Therefore, compulsory execution based on the ruling of recommending reconciliation in this case is rejected.

The plaintiff's claim is accepted.

유사 판례

-춘천지방법원강릉지원 2019.09.24 2018가합31098

-수원지방법원 2016.08.18 2016가단4101

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.06.05 2017가단5147408

-부산지방법원 서부지원 2021.04.01 2020가단115109

-서울남부지방법원 2015.05.28 2015나51215