logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.08.25 2015가합60926
배당이의
Text

1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendant are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiffs' claims 1) The plaintiffs A, B, and C are the plaintiffs A, B, and I Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "I").

) Based on the executory exemplification of the judgment in the case of return of membership fees by the Gwangju District Court 2014Gahap9047, I’s SCC Card Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “SCC Card”)

Of the monetary claims against Plaintiff A, Plaintiff A received a claim seizure and collection order as to KRW 122,266,673, Plaintiff B, and Plaintiff C, as to KRW 50,443,382, and Plaintiff C received a claim seizure and collection order as to KRW 50,443,382, and the above order became final and conclusive. 2) Plaintiff D received a claim seizure and collection order as to KRW 81,208,89, out of the monetary claims against I’s non-credit cards, based on an executory exemplification of the judgment in the case of return of membership deposits by the Gwangju District Court 2015Da7959, as to KRW 81,208,89, out of the monetary claims against I’s non-credit cards, and the above order became final and conclusive.

3) Based on the executory exemplification of the judgment in the case of return of membership fees from the Gwangju District Court in 2015Gahap559 against I, the Plaintiff E, the Seog Industry Limited Company, and F, based on the executory exemplification of the judgment in the case of return of membership fees to I, Plaintiff E, the 187,878,377 won, the 181,870,412 won, and the Plaintiff F, the 77,541,58 won, were issued a claim attachment and collection order with the Gwangju District Court 2015TTT1350, and the above order became final and conclusive. The Defendant’s claim against I against the Defendant was signed on July 9, 2015 by the J notary Public’s Joint Office No. 911 on the 2015, “The Defendant did not perform a notarial deed” to the effect that “The Defendant performed a notarial deed” was “a loan to the Defendant’s notarial deed” to the effect that the Defendant performed a notarial deed.

(c) I’s dividends procedure 1) Non-Cock Card deposited KRW 764,795,010, the seized portion of the credit card sales amount that I bears against I, as the case may be.

arrow