logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.09.28 2016나4803
청구이의
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows: 7, 9, 11, 12, 3, 4, 5, 13 and 15 "C" of the first instance court's judgment; 2, 7, 9, 11, 12, 4 and 20 "the defendant" of the second instance court's judgment "the plaintiff," 2, 11, 4, 21, 4 and 21, which are insufficient to recognize the defendant's assertion as evidence of the defendant's assertion, and 8, 11, 4 and 17, which are insufficient to recognize the defendant's assertion as evidence of the first instance court's judgment, shall be rejected, except for the addition of the following additional determinations, as stated in the reasoning of the first instance court's judgment, it shall be cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional matters to be determined;

A. The defendant asserts to the purport that if the plaintiff is not allowed to enforce compulsory execution due to the reason that the plaintiff paid the debt of this case after the defendant applied for compulsory auction against the plaintiff's real estate, the defendant as the creditor bears the loss of the expenses for the application for compulsory auction.

Even if the defendant paid the expenses for a compulsory auction application, it cannot be viewed as a ground for rejecting the claim objection itself.

However, the plaintiff shall pay the defendant the expenses for the application for compulsory auction, but it can be excluded from the executory power of the judgment in the previous suit (the expenses for the application for compulsory auction paid by the defendant fall under the expenses preferentially appropriated pursuant to Article 479 of the Civil Act). As seen earlier, even if the amount that the plaintiff paid to the defendant exceeds the amount of credit in this case and is appropriated in preference to the expenses for the application for compulsory auction paid by the defendant, even if the amount of credit in this case is appropriated in preference to the expenses paid

B. The defendant applied for a compulsory auction on the real estate owned by the plaintiff for the repayment of the amount of credit in this case.

arrow