beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. As to Defendant A Co., Ltd.: KRW 86,916,388 and KRW 44,030,077 among them:
B. Defendant C is deceased.
Reasons
1. The facts as indicated in the separate sheet of claim and each of the following changes shall be deemed to have been led by the Defendant Company to the confession between the Plaintiff and the Defendant Company A (hereinafter “Defendant Company”). The Plaintiff and the Defendant Company shall be deemed not to have conflict between the parties, or shall be acknowledged according to the purport of the evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including the serial number) and all of the arguments.
According to the above facts, the defendant company is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 86,916,38 won and 44,030,077 won among them, and the defendant C is jointly and severally liable with the defendant company to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 19% per annum from March 1, 2007 to the day of full payment with respect to 79,784,912 won among the above money and 44,030,777 won within the scope of the property inherited from the network D.
2. As to this, Defendant C alleged that the ten-year extinctive prescription period for the Plaintiff’s claim against the deceased D has expired, it is clear that the Plaintiff filed the lawsuit in this case on September 22, 2017, where the ten-year period for the claim established by the judgment has expired (Article 165(1) of the Civil Act). The Korea Asset Management Corporation filed a lawsuit against the Defendant and D by the Seoul Central District Court 2007Kadan90706. The above court rendered a judgment accepting the claim against the Korea Asset Management Corporation on September 21, 2007. The above judgment was affirmed on October 23, 2007. The facts that became final and conclusive on October 23, 2007 are significant in this court or remarkably, and the fact that the Plaintiff filed the lawsuit in this case on September 22, 2017, which was ten-year period after the above judgment became final and conclusive, and the Plaintiff’s claim against the deceased D was interrupted on September 22, 2017.
3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is justified, and all of them are accepted.