beta
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. In the first instance court’s judgment, the Plaintiff sought revocation of the Defendant’s disposition of business suspension on September 23, 2013 (from September 23, 2013 to February 22, 2014). The court of first instance rejected the Plaintiff’s lawsuit regarding “the part seeking revocation of the disposition of business suspension from September 23, 2013 to October 1, 2013” and accepted the Plaintiff’s claim regarding “the part seeking revocation of the disposition of business suspension from October 2, 2013 to February 22, 2014.”
Since only the defendant appealed to the above part of the loss, the object of this court's adjudication is limited to the part against the defendant.
2. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows: Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act shall be cited in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal of the part No. 8, No. 11 to No. 11 among the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance (3.c. c.) as stated below.
3. The part D) With respect to the order of seizure and collection of general creditors (the health class, Gap 13 through 19, and evidence No. 21 with respect to the instant case, in addition to the purport of the whole pleadings as to each of the items stated in the evidence No. 13 through 19, and No. 21 with respect to the order of seizure and collection, it can be acknowledged that the Gyeonggi District Court Co., Ltd. received multiple claims and collection orders with respect to each of the deposit claims held by the plaintiff against the financial institutions, etc. prior to the instant disposition as 8,845,843,418 won as Cheongju District Court Decision 2013Da1048, Apr. 19, 2013, based on the executory exemplification of the loan execution case No. 2012j2257, which was prior to the instant disposition, with respect to each of the deposit claims held by the plaintiff against the financial institutions, etc.
According to the above facts of recognition, the plaintiff.