beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s compulsory execution against the Plaintiff based on the Seoul Northern District Court Decision 2012Gadan19489 was conducted.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff for the return of the loan under this Court Order 2012Kadan19489. On May 16, 2014, the court rendered a judgment in favor of the Defendant that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant the amount of KRW 30 million and the amount calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from June 18, 2012 to the date of full payment” (hereinafter “instant judgment”), which states that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant the amount of KRW 30 million and the amount of money calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from June 18, 2012 to the date of full payment.” The amount
B. The Plaintiff, who was dissatisfied with the instant judgment, filed an appeal with this Court No. 2014Na3106, but the said court dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on December 12, 2014. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with Supreme Court Decision 2015Da6555, but the said court dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on May 14, 2015.
C. On June 23, 2014, the Defendant applied for a compulsory auction of real estate to the Southern District Court C according to the instant judgment.
On April 3, 2015, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 46,767,00 (the sum of the principal of the instant judgment and KRW 30,000,000,000, and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from June 18, 2012 to April 3, 2015, which is the deposit date), with the Defendant as the principal deposit account in this Court No. 1209 in 2015. On December 15, 2015, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 1,131,740 (the amount used as the money spent or prepaid as execution expenses in the instant real estate auction case) for enforcement expenses incurred in relation to the instant auction case as of December 15, 2015.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Eul evidence No. 10, fact inquiry results against the Seoul Southern District Court, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the above facts of recognition, since the plaintiff deposited the judgment of this case and its execution expenses, and thus all obligations based on the judgment of this case which became the source of the compulsory execution of this case were extinguished, compulsory execution based on the judgment of this case shall be dismissed.