logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2019.07.18 2018나11549
부당이득금반환
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On June 1, 2006, C (hereinafter “C”) and the Plaintiff and E (the former husband of the Plaintiff) drafted a loan certificate stating that “C borrows KRW 30 million from the Defendant, and the Plaintiff and E are jointly and severally and severally guaranteed the above loan obligation” (hereinafter “the instant loan certificate”) to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant loan certificate”).

B. On September 28, 2006, the Defendant filed an application for the payment order against C, E, and the Plaintiff for the payment order for the total amount of KRW 47,907,000 and delay damages therefor. On October 24, 2016, the Defendant received the payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) stating that “C, the Plaintiff, and E shall jointly and severally pay to the Defendant KRW 47,907,000 and the amount at the rate of KRW 20% per annum from the day following the delivery of the original copy of the payment order to the day of complete payment” (hereinafter “instant payment order”).

The payment order of this case was finalized on November 12, 2006 for the plaintiff, and November 14, 2006 for C and E.

C. On September 29, 2016, the Defendant applied for a compulsory execution against the Plaintiff’s corporeal movables (hereinafter “instant compulsory execution”) based on the instant payment order, and accordingly, received KRW 525,890 (hereinafter “instant grant”) from the auction procedure (G) conducted by the Seoul Western District Court enforcement officer on February 7, 2017, excluding the enforcement cost, from the proceeds of sale.

On November 11, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for objection to the instant payment order (hereinafter “instant objection”).

The first instance court of the foregoing case (Seoul District Court 2016Gadan2229) concluded the extinctive prescription on November 14, 2016, when ten years have elapsed since November 15, 2006, the following day after the date when the payment order of this case was finalized against C, and the Plaintiff’s joint and several liability obligation is extinguished at the same time.

arrow