logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.08.25 2016가단3948
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. On March 27, 2008, the Plaintiff filed a loan claim lawsuit against C (U.S. District Court 2007 Ghana 21041) and was sentenced to the judgment on March 27, 2008 that “C shall pay 15,000,000 won to the Plaintiff and its delayed damages.” The judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

B. On November 30, 2015, based on the original copy of the above judgment, the Plaintiff received a claim amounting to 54,139,725 won (principal KRW 15,00,000, interest KRW 39,139,725) from the court of this Court (on November 30, 2015, KRW 54,139,725) based on the original copy of the above judgment. The Plaintiff received a seizure and collection order (hereinafter “instant collection order”), which seizes the amount until the said claim amount by 1/2 of the balance remaining after deducting the tax and public charges from the wage claim received by C from the Defendant. The instant collection order was served to the Defendant around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserts that there is a wage claim that C receives monthly from the defendant, since the defendant operates a c's c's c's c's c's c's c's c's c's c's c's c's c's c'

However, it is not sufficient to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s assertion that there is a benefit claim against the Defendant in C solely with the descriptions of evidence Nos. 4 through 6, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Rather, according to the result of this court's response to the head of the Suwon Tax Office, it is only recognized that C did not have any income reported to the tax office on the ground that C received benefits from the Defendant.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion based on the premise that C has a benefit claim received every month from the defendant is without merit.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit.

arrow