logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원천안지원 2019.08.28 2019가단2076
추심금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff acquired the claim held by C with respect to a limited liability company D (hereinafter “D”) based on the final and conclusive judgment on the construction cost case No. 2013Na121 (hereinafter “final and conclusive judgment of this case”) from the Gwangju High Court, and was granted the succeeding execution clause as to the final and conclusive judgment of this case on July 2014 and September 1, 2014.

B. With the final and conclusive judgment of this case as executive title, the Plaintiff filed an application for the seizure and collection order of the claim with the content as stated in the purport of the application on February 13, 2019, stating that “D”, “Defendant”, “80,184,904 won,” and “the collection order of this case” with the content of the claim attachment and collection order as stated in the purport of the application on February 13, 2019, on the ground that “The claim for the transfer of ownership, which was completed under the receipt of No. 2332 as of January 18, 2011, for the registration of the purchase price and settlement amount, etc. to be paid on the basis of the registration of the transfer of ownership, which was completed as of January 18, 2011.

(C) received the instant collection order. On February 18, 2019, the instant collection order was served on the Defendant. 【The entries in the evidence Nos. 1 and 3, based on recognition, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant is liable to pay 80,184,904 won and damages for delay, which are the claim amount under the collection order of this case, to the plaintiff as the collection obligee, since the defendant was served with the collection order of this case.

In regard to this, the defendant asserted that the provisional registration of the EF in Gunsan City was only established on the security of the defendant's loan claim amounting to KRW 1 billion against D, and that since the defendant did not bear the obligation to pay the purchase price and the settlement amount against D, it is impossible to comply with the plaintiff's claim.

B. First of all, D’s registration of the purchase price and settlement amount, etc. based on the registration of the transfer of ownership right claim filed by the Jeonju District Court for the Defendant as to the EF in Gunsan-si.

arrow