logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원남원지원 2016.08.10 2016가단463
추심금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. In addition to the purport of the entire pleadings in the evidence No. 1 through No. 4 of the judgment as to the cause of the claim, it is acknowledged that on July 9, 2015, a notary public, based on the authentic copy of the notarial deed No. 4496 of the notarial deed No. 2013, a notary public, issued a seizure and collection order (No. 2015 other 5807 of the Jeonju District Court), against the Defendant, on the ground that the Plaintiff was served on the Defendant on August 11, 2015, with the original copy of the notarial deed No. 4496 of the notarial deed No. 2013, Jul. 9, 2015.

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the collection amount of KRW 50 million and damages for delay, unless there are special circumstances.

2. Judgment on the defendant's defense

A. The gist of the defense was that B had already transferred the claim of this case to a third party before the Defendant was served with the Plaintiff’s order of seizure and collection, and thus, the above order of seizure and collection has no effect against the Defendant.

B. Determination 1) If the obligor satisfies the requirements for setting up against the assignment of claims by notification with a fixed date, etc. after the obligor’s transfer of claims subject to attachment or provisional attachment, even if other creditors of the obligor’s subsequent attachment or provisional attachment against the transferred claims, it has no effect as a seizure or provisional attachment because the claims subject to attachment or provisional attachment are not existing at the time of the attachment or provisional attachment, and as such, other creditors may not participate in the execution procedure following the attachment, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2001Da10748, May 30, 2003; 2003Da22561, Sept. 3, 2004). In addition, considering the overall purport of pleading as indicated in the evidence 3-1 through 3, B transferred the instant claims to a stock company and delegated the right to notify the assignment of claims to the trust administrator, and delegated the right to notify the assignment of claims to the trust administrator.

arrow