logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원서부지원 2017.10.25 2017가단6676
청구이의
Text

1. The Defendant’s payment order was based on the loan payment order for the loan case No. 2017 tea 469 against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. In full view of the facts that there is no dispute between the parties to the judgment as to the cause of the claim and the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 100,000,000 from the Defendant on May 29, 2016, and KRW 3.550,000 won on July 18, 2016, and KRW 3.550,000 from the Defendant on March 13, 2017, the Defendant applied for a payment order against the Plaintiff for the payment of KRW 350,000,000 per annum 15% per annum from the day following the delivery of the original copy of the payment order to the day of full payment (hereinafter “instant payment order”) and the payment order received from the court on March 21, 2017 to the Plaintiff on March 27, 2017, which became final and conclusive before receiving the original payment order, but the Plaintiff may be recognized as having already paid the original payment order to the Defendant on March 13, 201516, 2017.

Therefore, according to the above facts of recognition, since the Plaintiff’s debt owed to the Defendant according to the payment order of this case has already been extinguished by repayment, barring any special circumstance, compulsory execution based on the above payment order of the Defendant against the Plaintiff cannot be permitted.

2. The defendant's assertion that the plaintiff paid KRW 100,000 to the defendant as of May 31, 2016, to the defendant as of May 31, 2016, in addition to the borrowed money under the payment order in this case, the defendant asserts that the defendant has repaid the plaintiff with the borrowed money separately. However, there is no evidence to prove that the defendant lent the money in addition to the borrowed money

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and the suspension of compulsory execution based on the payment order of this case is ordered ex officio under Article 47 (1) of the Civil Execution Act until this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

arrow