logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원부천지원 2017.11.09 2017가단9130
추심금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On September 29, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Incheon District Court (hereinafter “B Housing Redevelopment Improvement Project Promotion Committee”) seeking the payment of loans under Section B’s 2016Gadan1047, and the said court rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff that “The B Housing Redevelopment Improvement Project Promotion Committee shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 50,000,000 and the interest calculated at the rate of KRW 15% per annum from December 10, 2015 to the date of full payment.” On November 17, 2016, the said court rendered a lawsuit seeking the payment of loans under Section B’s 2016Gada17999, and rendered a favorable judgment against the Plaintiff at the rate of KRW 10,000 and KRW 15% per annum from July 28, 2016 to the date of full payment, respectively.”

B. On October 27, 2016, with the title of execution of the judgment with executory power in the above case No. 2016 group 1047, the Plaintiff received the claim amounting to KRW 56,369,915 among the claims to be returned by the Defendant, who is the debtor, to the Establishment Promotion Committee of B Housing Redevelopment Improvement Project, from the Incheon District Court Branch of the Incheon District Court on October 27, 2016. The above decision was served on the Defendant on October 31, 2016. The Plaintiff served the original of the judgment with executory power in the above case No. 2016 group 1799, with the title of execution, as the collection order of KRW 10,00,00 including the claim amount to be returned by the Defendant, who is the debtor, to the Establishment Promotion Committee of B Housing Redevelopment Improvement Project, and each of the above collection orders should be issued to the Defendant on December 26, 2016.

The above decision was served on the Defendant on December 28, 2016. [The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, each entry in Gap evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.]

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment.

arrow