(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2015.07.21 2014가단125746

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) 서울북부지방법원 2015.07.21 2014가단125746

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 January 24, 2013, the Plaintiff received a decision of provisional seizure of claims (hereinafter “decision of provisional seizure of this case”) from the Suwon District Court for KRW 34,744,00 among the claim for construction price against the Defendant by Nonparty D, under the jurisdiction of the Suwon District Court, for KRW 2013Kadan133. The said decision was served on the Defendant on January 30, 2013.

B. On December 16, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Suwon District Court for the payment of the construction cost of KRW 34,744,005 and the delayed payment damages, as the Suwon District Court Branch Branch Decision 2013da28405, and the said court rendered a favorable judgment on April 10, 2014, and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

C. On May 7, 2014, the Defendant issued a collection order (hereinafter “instant collection order”) against D as to KRW 38,323,106 (the amount of KRW 34,744,00 to be transferred from provisional seizure to seizure) among the claim for the construction price against D’s Defendant under the Suwon District Court Branch of Suwon Branch of 2014TTT346, May 7, 2014, and the said order was served on the Defendant on August 21, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff of the party's assertion claims against the defendant, according to the collection order of this case, 38,323,106 won and damages for delay are claimed against the defendant.

On the other hand, the defendant asserts that there was no contract between D and D, and that D cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim because it did not bear the obligation of construction cost.

B. The existence of the claim to be collected is a requisite fact, and the burden of proof is also borne by the Plaintiff. The written evidence Nos. 6 and 7 regarding the existence of the claim to be collected in the collection order of this case was concluded between the Defendant and D, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu.

The provisional attachment order of this case is delivered to the defendant on January 2, 2013.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.04.14 2016가단5015283

-인천지방법원 2015.06.10 2014가단53294

-서울북부지방법원 2015.11.03 2014가단49880

-수원지방법원성남지원 2017.11.10 2017가단207962

-창원지방법원통영지원 2015.11.10 2014가단13333