beta
Text
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On April 26, 2013, the Defendant entered into the instant construction contract with the Defendant and the IMD Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “MD Construction”) by setting the construction amount of KRW 1,210,00,000, and entered into the instant construction contract with the IMD Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “MD Construction”). Around November 201, 2013, IMD Construction completed the instant construction project.
B. The Plaintiff filed an application for a payment order against MD Construction, Non-Party C, and D for a payment order of KRW 240,000,000 for the cost of the Changho Urban Residential Housing Construction (hereinafter “instant payment order”) with the Gwangju District Court on July 18, 2013, stating that “MD Construction, C, and D shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 240,000,000,000 per annum from the day following the delivery of the original copy of the payment order to the day of full payment order and KRW 20% per annum from the day of full payment (hereinafter “instant payment order”).
(2) On September 27, 2013, based on the original copy of the instant order for payment, the Plaintiff received the instant order for seizure and collection (hereinafter “instant order”). On September 18, 2013, the Plaintiff, based on the original copy of the instant order for payment, issued the instant order for seizure and collection (hereinafter “instant order for collection”) with the obligor construction and third obligor amounting to KRW 248,547,945, the amount of the Defendant and the third obligor’s claim was KRW 248,547,945. The instant order for collection was served on the Defendant on October 18, 2013.
C. In the case of objection between IMD Construction and the Plaintiff’s claim for refusal of compulsory execution based on the original copy of the instant payment order (Seoul District Court 2014Gahap5417), Gwangju District Court on February 12, 2015, on the ground that the Plaintiff’s claim for the cost of original construction was extinguished.