(영문) 인천지방법원 2014.01.14 2012가단64009

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 인천지방법원 2014.01.14 2012가단64009

추심금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Each description of basic facts [Evidence] Gap 1, 2, and 3

A. On March 30, 2012, the Plaintiff was issued a provisional attachment order of KRW 43,042,00,000 against the Defendant under the Incheon District Court Decision 2012Kadan4303, which was the claim amount of KRW 40,000 against B (hereinafter the provisional attachment order of this case). The provisional attachment order of this case was served on the Defendant on April 4, 2012, and the Incheon District Court Decision 2012Kadan22814, filed a lawsuit against B with the claim amounting to KRW 43,042,00 and the damages for delay were paid annually from November 1, 201 to March 23, 2012, and the next decision was finalized around December 5, 2012.

B. Next, the Plaintiff received a seizure and collection order for KRW 40,00,000, which was provisionally seized among the gold price claim against B against the Defendant as the Incheon District Court 2012TTTB, and KRW 46,961,770, which was the sum of KRW 6,961,770 (the amount according to the foregoing final judgment from November 1, 201 to July 24, 201) and KRW 46,961,770 (hereinafter “the instant seizure and collection order”), and the instant seizure and collection order was served on the Defendant on August 6, 2012.

2. The Plaintiff’s existence of the Defendant’s obligation to pay the collection amount is the collection amount pursuant to the instant seizure and collection order, and the Plaintiff claimed against the Defendant for the delayed payment from August 7, 2012 to the date of complete payment from August 7, 2012, which is the day following the delivery of the Defendant’s instant seizure and collection order. As to this, the Defendant, prior to receiving the instant provisional seizure order, filed a claim for the monetary payment amount against the Defendant, which the Plaintiff is obliged to pay, on the ground that the payment was terminated by the completion of the transaction of gold supply between B and B, prior to receiving the instant provisional seizure order, on March 14, 2012.

First, as of April 4, 2012, the delivery date of the provisional seizure order against the defendant, the time and thereafter.

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2017.09.22 2015가단231010

-서울중앙지방법원 2014.11.19 2013가단5176859

-수원지방법원성남지원 2017.06.16 2016가단19878

-수원지방법원 2018.11.28 2018가단514497

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.01.12 2014가단104474