logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2015.10.28 2015가단211738
약정금
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

ex officio, we examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

Where a party who has received a final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party institutes a lawsuit again against the other party to the lawsuit identical to the previous suit in favor of a final and conclusive judgment, the subsequent suit is unlawful as there is no benefit in the protection of rights, and exceptionally, where it is obvious that the ten-year lapse period of extinctive prescription of claims based on a final and conclusive judgment has expired, the benefit

According to the purport of the entire pleadings as to this case's health class, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including additional numbers), the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant for the agreed amount claim against the Seoul Central District Court 2005Kadan66860, Aug. 31, 2005, and sentenced the above court to "the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 65 million won and the amount calculated by the rate of 20% per annum from April 1, 2005 to the day of complete payment." The above judgment became final and conclusive on September 28, 2005; the plaintiff's above judgment as executive title was recognized that the defendant seized corporeal movables owned by the defendant on March 5, 2007 and March 13, 2007 and received part of the amount of money in the compulsory execution procedure.

According to the above facts, the extinctive prescription of a claim based on the above judgment was interrupted on March 5, 2007 by the above seizure, and it again proceeded after the auction procedure was completed.

Therefore, as of May 26, 2015, the date of filing the instant lawsuit, the extinctive prescription period of which still remains more than one year and eight months, it is recognized that the expiration of the extinctive prescription period is imminent. Therefore, there is no benefit in the instant lawsuit.

Therefore, since the lawsuit of this case is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit, it is decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

arrow