logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.09.26 2016가단5306507
양수금
Text

1. The Defendant is jointly and severally with the Plaintiff as to KRW 29,210,038 and KRW 19,048,00 among them, starting from July 20, 2016.

Reasons

1. The part cited (each general loan loan claim acquired from a gold-backed credit union);

A. In full view of the respective descriptions and the purport of the entire pleadings as to the cause of the claim Gap's evidence Nos. 1, 3 through 5, and 8 through 10 (including additional numbers), the defendant is obligated to pay the unpaid principal and interest and delay damages to the plaintiff, except in extenuating circumstances.

B. The Defendant’s assertion asserts that “the extinctive prescription for each of the above claims has expired”

In light of the records of evidence Nos. 9 and 10, the judgment on each of the above claims became final and conclusive in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, and it can be known that the lawsuit of this case was filed before the lapse of 10 years thereafter (in the case of claims for which the judgment became final and conclusive, the period of extinctive prescription is 10 years). Thus,

C. If so, this part of the plaintiff's claim is justified, we accept it.

2. The dismissed portion (credit card payment claim received from the National Bank of Korea) as well as the whole purport of each of the statements and arguments (including serial numbers) Nos. 1, 2, 6, and 8 (including additional numbers) are recognized as having the same cause of claim as that stated in the separate sheet. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid principal and interest and delay damages, as stated in the

The Defendant asserts to the effect that “the extinctive prescription has been completed for the above claim,” and the Plaintiff asserts to the effect that “the decision of performance recommendation with respect to the above claim became final and conclusive.”

In this regard, the defendant's national card was issued, and the defendant's lawsuit (the Jeonju District Court 2007 Ghana93277) seems to have been filed, and it was written in Gap evidence 7.

arrow