logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.02.13 2014가합5948
추심금
Text

1. The defendant shall pay 150,000,000 won to the plaintiff and 20% per annum from July 18, 2014 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

(a) Gyeongcheon S&D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Gyeongcheon S&D”)’s seizure and assignment order 1) Gyeongcheon S&D’s claim amounting to KRW 314,413,545 (the principal amount leased is KRW 300 million, KRW 14,054,795, KRW 300 per annum from October 9, 2013 to December 4, 2013) based on the executory exemplification of 2013 document No. 2420 prepared by the notary public, which was executed by the same law firm as the notary public, as the executory exemplification of the document No. 2420, Dec. 6, 2013 (hereinafter “B”).

338,713,420 acquisition tax reduction and exemption refund claim amounting to 338,713,420 households of Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si (hereinafter “instant refund claim”).

(3) The assignment order of this case is “the assignment order of this case” and “the assignment order of this case” is “the assignment order of this case” as to the attachment and assignment order of this case.

(2) On December 3, 2014, the instant attachment and assignment order was issued to the Defendant, a garnishee, on December 11, 2013. (2) The Defendant paid the full amount of KRW 314,413,545 on Gyeongcheon S&D pursuant to the instant assignment order.

3) However, the instant attachment and assignment order was not served on B, the debtor, and on June 25, 2014, in the instant case No. 2013TTTT 2013TT 12307, the Busan District Court rendered a decision to revoke the instant assignment order part of the instant attachment and assignment order and to dismiss the application for the assignment order of Gyeongcheon S&D (hereinafter “instant previous decision”).

(4) Around June 30, 2014, the previous decision of this case was served on the Defendant on June 27, 2014, and on June 30, 2014. The court filed an immediate appeal against the previous decision of this case on June 30, 2014, and the said court rendered a decision revoking the previous decision of this case on July 4, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as the “decision revoking this case”).

arrow