logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.10.20 2020가단5062866
대여금 등
Text

1. The defendant shall be jointly and severally with the non-party C to the plaintiff 28,396,556 won and 24,171,295 won among them.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. (i) On June 28, 1999, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming a loan, etc. against Nonparty C and the Defendant on the ground of the following: (a) as Seoul District Court Decision 99Da154018, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming a security deposit against Nonparty C and the Defendant.

B on October 28, 1999, the first instance court of the lawsuit B B, which held that the non-party C and the defendant are subject to service by public notice, and the following judgment of the first instance court of the lawsuit is hereinafter referred to as "the first lawsuit judgment").

A. The Court rendered a ruling.

1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant C shall pay 18,865,734 won and one of them) 24,171,295 won per annum from June 16, 1995 to December 18, 197, 20% per annum from December 1997 to December 25, 197, 25% per annum from December 26, 1997 to October 11, 1998, 25% per annum from 19.29 to 19.29: 10% per annum from October 1998; 20% per annum from 19.2.9 to 19.19; 19.4% per annum from October 12, 198 to 19.4; 19.0% per annum from February 1, 199 to 19; 20% per annum from 19.0 to 19.4% per annum; and

B. Defendant B is jointly and severally with Defendant C.

Of the money stated in the port, 28,396,56 won and 24,171,295 won among them shall be paid 18% per annum from June 16, 1995 to December 18, 197; 20% per annum from December 1997 to December 25, 197; 25% per annum from December 26, 1997 to October 11, 198; and 21% per annum from October 12, 198 to January 31, 1999; and 19% per annum from February 1, 199 to December 199.

B. As the period of extinctive prescription of the judgment of the court of first instance in the judgment of the court of second lawsuit is imminent, the plaintiff on July 3, 2009 against the non-party C and the defendant for the purpose of interrupting extinctive prescription of the claim based on the judgment of the court of first lawsuit in the above judgment of the court of first lawsuit.

arrow