logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2020.09.17 2020가단2636
제3자이의
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant filed a motion for the seizure of corporeal movables with G with the Seoul Southern District Court on the corporeal movables listed in the separate list owned by Gangseo-gu Seoul E and 6th class F (hereinafter “instant corporeal movables”) based on the No. 307 of the D Deed No. 307 of 2019 (principal KRW 124,720,800) (hereinafter “instant corporeal movables”).

B. On October 24, 2019, the enforcement officer of the said court seized the instant corporeal movables.

C. On February 14, 2020, the Plaintiff entered into a transfer contract with H, stating that “AH was unable to pay wages for March 3, 4, and May 2019, and transferred the instant corporeal movables to the Plaintiff instead of wages” (hereinafter “instant transfer contract”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff was an employee of C (I). However, the instant corporeal movables owned by J (hereinafter “J”) and the Plaintiff acquired the instant corporeal movables in lieu of the payment of unpaid benefits from H, the representative of J, and merely because C temporarily used the instant corporeal movables, the instant corporeal movables are owned by the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the execution of seizure of the instant corporeal movables is improper.

B. A lawsuit of demurrer by a third party is a lawsuit seeking an objection against a compulsory execution that infringes upon a third party’s right when the third party holds ownership of the subject matter of compulsory execution or has a right to prevent the transfer or delivery of the subject matter (Article 48(1) of the Civil Execution Act). In such cases, the right to prevent transfer or delivery should be reverted to the third party at the time of seizure.

However, even according to the plaintiff's assertion, the plaintiff prepared the transfer contract of this case on February 14, 2020 after the seizure of the corporeal movables of this case.

arrow