beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 435,482 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from April 24, 2019 to August 22, 2019.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On December 13, 2017, the Defendant was issued a decision on provisional seizure of claim (hereinafter “provisional seizure of this case”) with respect to an amount equal to KRW 40,000,000 among the Plaintiff’s deposit claims against the Plaintiff Company C as a claim claim amount of KRW 40,000,000, which is a part of the Plaintiff’s loan claims against the Plaintiff, as the Suwon District Court Branch Branch 2017Kadan661, Dec. 13, 2017, and the said decision was served on C, a garnishee, a debtor, on December 26, 2017.
The remaining balance of the plaintiff in the account at the time of the corporation C is 14,99,373 won.
B. On February 9, 2018, the Defendant again received a decision on provisional seizure of claims against the amount of KRW 57,304,627 out of the amount of the claim for profit under the real estate security trust agreement entered into between Suwon District Court Branch Branch 2018Kadan60477 and the Plaintiff’s claim for KRW 57,304,627 with respect to the Plaintiff’s loan claim against the Plaintiff, which was KRW 57,304,627, among the claim for profit under the real estate security trust agreement entered into with D in Gwangju City E-si, and the said provisional seizure order was served on D, a debtor, on February 23, 2018.
C. Meanwhile, on January 9, 2018, the Defendant filed a lawsuit claiming a loan (hereinafter “instant principal lawsuit”) against the Plaintiff on the grounds of the principal lawsuit of the instant provisional attachment order against the Plaintiff, Sung-nam District Court 2018Kadan200692, Suwon District Court, and the claim was dismissed on November 30, 2018, and this judgment became final and conclusive.
At the same time, the defendant lent 75,00,000 won in total to the plaintiff through F for construction costs of a new house. The plaintiff is obligated to pay the defendant a loan of 75,000,000 won and damages for delay thereof, and even if not, F remitted 75,00,000 won to the bank account in the name of the plaintiff to the bank account in the name of the plaintiff and acquired the above money. Thus, the plaintiff's act is held liable as a joint tortfeasor of F's fraud, but the court argued the above assertion.