beta
Text
1. Of the instant lawsuits, the part concerning the claim of KRW 2,428,00 shall be dismissed.
2. The plaintiff's remainder.
Reasons
1. Summary of the parties' arguments
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff: (a) constructed a 4 household unit (the instant house) on the land near C and the neighboring three lots of land near the Kuju-si; (b) provided an indirect loan from the Defendant; (c) did not bear a direct obligation against the Defendant; (d) Nevertheless, as if the Defendant had a claim against the Plaintiff, the Defendant misleads the Plaintiff as if he had a claim; (e) on September 21, 2015, the Seoul Western District Court 2015Kadan4089, the claim for a provisional attachment order of KRW 115,00,000 for the construction cost of the instant house owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant provisional attachment”); and (e) filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff for construction cost claim as Seoul Western District Court 2016Ka28098 (hereinafter “instant principal lawsuit”).
3) All of the instant provisional attachment and the instant principal lawsuit are finalized against the Defendant. During that process, the Plaintiff suffered damages of KRW 29,160,000 equivalent to the interest on the purchase price, ② litigation costs (six times, such as legal advisory fees, answers, briefs, etc.) 1,628,000, ③ KRW 800,000, total of KRW 31,588,000,000, in the presence at court, on the ground that the Plaintiff and the Defendant were liable to compensate the Plaintiff for the said damages. (B) The Defendant, around May 30, 2014, concluded a contract for construction works on the instant housing, and completed construction works on the instant housing, but was not paid the construction price of KRW 115,00,00,00.
2. Accordingly, the Defendant applied for provisional seizure of real estate against the instant housing, etc., and received the decision of provisional seizure, and filed a lawsuit on the merits to receive the construction price, and lost the result of failure to properly respond to the law, and did not knowingly proceed with the provisional seizure or the lawsuit on the merits. Thus, the Defendant cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s request, inasmuch as he was aware of
2. Determination
A. The part of the lawsuit in this case, including the costs of lawsuit, is ex officio with KRW 1,628,00.