logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.05.30 2013가합67940
양수금
Text

1. The defendant shall pay 780,840,000 won to the plaintiff and 24% per annum from September 27, 2012 to the day of full payment.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. 1) B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”).

(2) On February 23, 2012, the Plaintiff’s claim for the construction cost as to the new construction of an apartment unit C in Young-gu, Young-gu, Young-gu (hereinafter “instant claim for the construction cost”).

(2) Around February 24, 2012, when the notice of transfer was delivered, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 4.48 billion to the Plaintiff, and the notice was served to the Defendant by content-certified mail, and on February 24, 2012, the claim for the instant construction cost was issued, and at least around March 29, 2012, the Plaintiff received KRW 2.24,024 million (hereinafter “prepaid construction cost”) from the Defendant around March 29, 2012 and around April 5, 2013, there was a total of KRW 78,084,00 (hereinafter “prepaid construction cost”).

3) Meanwhile, the agreed interest rate on the claim for the construction price of this case as agreed between the defendant and B is 24% per annum. [The purport of each of the evidence Nos. 1 through 3, No. 2 and No. 5, and all of the arguments is as follows.]

B. According to the above facts of determination, the Defendant is obligated to pay delay damages calculated at the rate of 24% per annum from September 27, 2012 to the date of full payment, which is the remainder of the construction price claim of this case that the Plaintiff acquired by the Plaintiff, and from September 27, 2012 to the date of full payment.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant asserted that the payment of KRW 58,381,00,000, out of the remainder of the construction price other than the fixed construction price, among the instant claim for the construction price that the Plaintiff acquired, was reserved in consideration of the fact that the seizure and collection order was previously issued, and the remainder was paid to the claim group, including B, etc. on April 18, 2013. On July 24, 2013, the Defendant demanded the payment of the said reserved amount from the Plaintiff and deposited it in the court because it cannot be known who is the legitimate recipient. Accordingly, the Defendant’s liability for the payment of the

(b).

arrow