logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2016.01.28 2014가합14468
추심금
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On October 21, 2010, D’s claim against the Defendant was rendered a decision of provisional seizure of real estate E’s underground floor No. 101 during the Gyeyang-si, the Defendant owned, with a view to preserving the claim for damages against the Defendant.

(Songyang District Court 2010Kadan100978). (b)

1) On June 4, 2013, the Plaintiff requested the seizure and collection order against KRW 400 million among the claims for provisional seizure against the above real estate, and received the seizure and collection order on June 7, 2013 (Seoul Southern District Court 2013TTTT 11635; hereinafter “instant claim seizure and collection order”).

(2) On August 12, 2013, the date of service is indicated in the notice of postal service to the Defendant, who is the garnishee of the instant order of seizure and collection, as “Seoul Seocho-gu F 408” (hereinafter “408”), and the recipient is indicated as “Semanman G” by the recipient.

hereinafter referred to as "service of this case"

(iii) [Ground of recognition] unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 5 (including each number, hereinafter the same shall apply);

100,000,000,00

2. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. Since the original copy of the decision on the seizure and collection order of this case was served lawfully at the defendant's office, the original copy of the decision on the seizure and collection order of this case, the defendant is liable to pay to the plaintiff, the collection obligee, KRW 400 million, and delay damages therefrom according to the above seizure and collection order.

B. The summary of the defendant's assertion is that the defendant's office is not the defendant's office, and G is not a delivery agency, and the service of this case is illegal and invalid.

3. Determination on the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit

A. According to Articles 229(4) and 227(2) and (3) of the Civil Execution Act, a collection order shall be served on the garnishee, and the collection order shall take effect when it is served on the garnishee.

On the other hand, there is a seizure and collection order against the claim.

arrow