logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원안산지원 2016.06.22 2016가단1076
양수금
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. As the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff sought payment of KRW 45,071,060 to the Defendant, who was transferred from B from B.

B. As to this, the Defendant, in the rehabilitation procedure where the Plaintiff’s instant claim was in progress against the Defendant, was registered in the list of rehabilitation creditors, and accordingly, the Plaintiff’s instant claim was unlawful as it did not have any interest in the lawsuit.

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. According to the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter “Act”), when any custodian, any rehabilitation creditor, any rehabilitation secured creditor, any shareholder or any equity right holder raises an objection on the inspection period or the special inspection date, the contents of the reported rehabilitation claims and rehabilitation security rights or rehabilitation security rights, if there is no objection thereto, the amount of the reported rehabilitation claims and rehabilitation security rights, which are entered in the list submitted by the custodian, are determined (Article 166 of the Act). When any confirmed rehabilitation claims and rehabilitation security rights are entered in the table of rehabilitation creditors and rehabilitation secured right, the entry into the list of rehabilitation creditors, any rehabilitation secured creditor, any shareholder, any equity right holder has the same effect as a final and conclusive judgment (Article 168 of the Act). In such a case, any rehabilitation creditor or any rehabilitation secured right holder may perform compulsory execution against the debtor according to the table of rehabilitation creditors or the table of rehabilitation secured creditors (Article 292(2) of the

B. In light of the aforementioned legal principles, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in each of the statements in Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the decision was made against the defendant on October 11, 2013 as Suwon District Court 2013hap84, and the decision was made on August 13, 2014, and the decision was made for rehabilitation plan approval on August 13, 2014, and the said rehabilitation procedure became final and conclusive as KRW 45,071,060, which is the full amount of the above debt against the plaintiff.

arrow