beta
Cases
2014Gaz. 1611
Plaintiff
O0 Stock Companies
Defendant
Gyeong-si, Inc.
Conclusion of Pleadings
June 12, 2014
Imposition of Judgment
June 26, 2014
Text
1. The instant lawsuit was concluded on April 29, 2014, which became final and conclusive on April 11, 2014, in the Cheongju District Court Decision 2014 tea1462.
2. The administrator of the custodian of the BBA corporation of the rehabilitation company is dismissed the objection raised on April 28, 2014 against the above payment order of the △△△△△△.
3. 소송종료 이후에 생긴 소송비용은 회생회사 ♧♧♧ 주식회사의 관리인 ☆☆☆이 부 담한다.
Purport of claim
The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 386,696,103 won with 20% interest per annum from the day of service of the original copy of the instant payment order to the day of complete payment.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
The following facts are clear in records:
A. On April 10, 2014, the Plaintiff sought a payment order against the Defendant for the payment of the debt acquisition amount. The summary of the cause of the application is as follows.
'원고는 2014. 4. 2. ♧♧♧ 주식회사로부터 ♧♧♧ 주식회사의 피고에 대한 386,696,103원 상당의 물품대금 채권을 양수받았다. 그런데 피고가 위 물품대금 채권 을 변제하지 아니하고 있으므로 그 지급을 구한다'
B. On April 11, 2014, this Court rendered a payment order with the content that "the debtor (the defendant) shall pay to the creditor (the plaintiff) the amount of KRW 386,696,103 with interest of 20% per annum from the day following the delivery date of the original payment order to the day of complete payment." The above payment order was served on the defendant on April 14, 2014.
다. 그런데 ♧♧♧ 주식회사에 대하여 2014. 4. 22. 회생절차가 개시되었고, 회생회사 ABB의 법률상 관리인 ☆☆☆은 2014. 4. 28. '위 독촉사건에 관하여 채무자는 2014. 4. 14. 지급명령 정본을 송달받았으나 이에 불복하여 이의신청을 합니다'라는 내용으로 이 법원에 이 사건 지급명령에 대한 이의신청을 하였다.
2. Determination
A payment order shall become final and conclusive as the lapse of the period of filing an objection, if the debtor does not file a lawful objection within two weeks from the date of receiving the payment order (Articles 470 and 474 of the Civil Procedure Act). Meanwhile, where a person who is entitled to file an objection against the payment order is the debtor (Article 469(2) of the Civil Procedure Act), and where a person who is not a person files an objection against the payment order without delay, the objection against the payment order shall be dismissed by the court by decision (Article 471(1) of the same Act).
As to the instant case, even though the legal administrator of BB of the rehabilitation company is not the debtor of the instant branch order, the instant order for payment was filed. Therefore, the instant objection is unlawful, and the instant order for payment was concluded on April 29, 2014 when the period for filing an objection was too limited, and the instant lawsuit was concluded by the said order for payment became final and conclusive.
3. Conclusion
Therefore, since the objection against the payment order of this case by the manager of BB of the rehabilitation company B/S is legitimate, the objection against the payment order of this case is dismissed, and the lawsuit of this case was terminated upon the above payment order became final and conclusive, so it is so decided as per Disposition.
Judges
(Presiding Judge)
Madnaments
Han-hee