(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.05.12 2015가단5689

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.05.12 2015가단5689

추심금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff, as to D, has a claim of KRW 59,585,00 based on the payment order issued by the Daegu District Court 2014 tea5760.

Based on the above claim, on January 2, 2015, the Plaintiff received a seizure and collection order as to the claim for construction price of KRW 15,668,049 against Defendant D and KRW 15,668,048 against Defendant C.

(Seoul District Court 20171 (hereinafter “instant seizure and collection order”). The instant seizure and collection order was served on January 7, 2015 on the Defendants, respectively, and was not served on D.

On the other hand, E, another creditor of D, filed a claim for collection against the Defendants (Tgu District Court 2014Kadan28852). On January 5, 2015, prior to the delivery of the instant seizure and collection order, E and the Defendants filed for the following adjustments.

The above mediation D was present as a participant in the mediation.

C. Foods

1. By January 31, 2015, the Defendants shall pay each seven million won to E by means of remitting to E account.

2. E, the Defendants, and the conciliation intervenors shall waive all of their claims in the future and shall not raise civil or criminal objections, except as otherwise provided for in paragraph (1).

3. The Mediation Intervenor D consents to the receipt by the Plaintiff of the full amount of the money set forth in Paragraph 1 relating to the construction cost of this case.

[Grounds for recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination

A. Since the Plaintiff’s assertion was served prior to the Defendants’ payment of the money, the seizure and collection order of the instant case was served by the Defendants, the seizure against the Defendants was conducted concurrently.

Therefore, the defendants performed their obligations to deposit the amount of claims to E even though they were liable to do so, and it cannot be asserted against the plaintiff. Therefore, the defendants are liable to pay the amount of claims to the plaintiff.

(b)a seizure has already been made with respect to any claim at the time of attachment agreement and any claim at the time of entry into force.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2016.11.09 2016나305875

-대구지방법원 2019.05.17 2018가단140811

-대구지방법원 안동지원 2018.09.12 2017가단4249

-서울남부지방법원 2019.10.24 2019나581

-광주지방법원 2016.09.09 2016가단12637