logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2019.07.04 2019가단2813
청구이의
Text

1. The Defendant’s payment order against the Plaintiff was based on the Seoul Western District Court Decision 2013Hu83124.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) filed an application against the Plaintiff for a payment order of the acquisition amount under the Seoul Western District Court Decision 2013Hu83124, Dec. 6, 2013, the said court rendered a payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) against the Plaintiff that “the Plaintiff shall pay the Plaintiff KRW 5,902,422 and 1,640,000, calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from the day after the original copy of the payment order was served to the day of full payment.” The said order was finalized on December 28, 2013.

B. On June 30, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application for bankruptcy and immunity with the Suwon District Court No. 2017Hadan3014, 2017Ma3014, and the decision of immunity (hereinafter “instant decision of immunity”) became final and conclusive on June 30, 2018. The Plaintiff did not include C’s claim based on the decision of the instant payment order in the list of creditors of the bankruptcy and exemption case.

C. On February 27, 2019, C transferred the claim against the Plaintiff to the Defendant, and sent a content-certified mail notifying the assignment of claims on April 25, 2019, and the above content-certified mail reached the Plaintiff around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion becomes aware of the existence of the obligation against the defendant after the decision on immunity of this case, and the decision on immunity granted by the plaintiff does not have been omitted in bad faith, and the effect of immunity granted by the plaintiff extends to the defendant

Therefore, compulsory execution based on the decision of the payment order of this case should not be permitted.

3. Article 566 subparagraph 7 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act provides that "a claim that is not entered in the list of creditors in bad faith by an obligor" means a case where the obligor, despite being aware of the existence of an obligation against a bankruptcy creditor before immunity is granted, does not enter it in the list of creditors. Therefore, if the obligor was unaware of the existence of an obligation, he did not know such fact.

arrow