logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2016.11.09 2015가단132615
청구이의
Text

1. A certificate of 2015 drawn up by C of June 8, 2015, prepared by the defendant at the Seoul Northern District Prosecutors' Office against the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On June 8, 2015, the notary public C belonging to the Seoul Northern District Prosecutors’ Office prepared, at the commission of the Plaintiff and the Defendant, a notarial deed stating that the Plaintiff does not raise any objection even if he is subject to compulsory execution (hereinafter referred to as the “notarial deed of this case”) with respect to one promissory note issued and delivered by the Plaintiff to the Defendant under Article 319 of the 2015, with respect to the payment of the above amount.

B. On June 10, 2015, the Plaintiff returned KRW 12,000,000 to a bank account under the Defendant’s name.

C. Around September 2015, the Defendant applied for a collection order for the Plaintiff’s deposit claim under Seoul Eastern District Court 2015TTTT12470, based on the instant authentic deed, and received a decision on September 7, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 3, purport of whole pleading

2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff’s repayment of KRW 12,00,000 to the Defendant on June 10, 2015 to the Defendant, and the execution claim of this case was fully extinguished. Thus, barring any special circumstance, compulsory execution based on the notarial deed of this case shall not be permitted.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. On June 11, 2015, the Defendant requested that the Plaintiff borrow money again from the Defendant, and asked that the instant Notarial Deed be valid instead of preparing a new loan certificate. Accordingly, the Defendant did not separately receive a loan certificate and lent KRW 15,000,000 to the Plaintiff on June 11, 2015, and thereafter, the Plaintiff did not repay the said loan amount to the Defendant. Accordingly, the instant Notarial Deed is asserted to be valid until now.

B. However, after the execution certificate as to a certain legal relationship between the parties has been prepared, that document.

arrow