logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.01.18 2017재나346
소유권이전등기
Text

1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by an independent party.

Reasons

1. The following facts, which have become final and conclusive in the judgment subject to review, are apparent in records or obvious to this court:

In the case of the agreement amount, etc. of the Seoul District Court 2002 tea19501, which was rendered by the Intervenor and the Intervenor against K, a representative director on December 4, 2002, the Plaintiffs are as follows: “The Intervenor and K Co., Ltd. shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiffs KRW 3,982,40,000 and delay damages therefor (for the Intervenor, January 10, 1994; for K Co., Ltd, from January 28, 1995; for the period from July 28, 1995; for the period from December 30, 2002 to December 30, 2002; and for the period from the following day to the date of full payment).”

(2) On January 14, 2003, the above payment order was finalized on January 14, 2003.2) Based on the payment order of this case against K Co., Ltd., the plaintiffs received the claim amounting to 5,640,823,441 won (principal interest of KRW 1,658,423,441) from the Seoul District Court branch of North Korea branch of the Seoul District Court, and the claim amounting to 5,640,823,441 won (principal interest of KRW 3,982,40,00,658, 423,441 won) from K Y-dong reconstruction Association and the Credit Completion Construction Corporation. The above payment order was finalized around that time.

3) Based on the above assignment order, on October 21, 2003, the plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against Yeung District Court 2003Gahap76990 (Seoul Central District Court 5,640,823,441 won (Seoul Central District Court 5,640,823, and 441 won (hereinafter referred to as "the whole amount") and the interest for arrears against it. The plaintiff was ruled against the Seoul High Court 2004Na67495 (Seoul High Court 2004 or 67495), and the mediation statement (hereinafter referred to as "the related mediation statement") of October 27, 2006, which was the appellate court.

arrow