logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원안양지원 2017.06.15 2016가단109879
청구이의
Text

1. Compulsory execution based on the original copy of the payment order (No. 201) No. 2857 against the Defendant’s Plaintiff is enforced against the Suwon District Court.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On August 8, 2011, the Defendant issued a payment order to the Plaintiff and Nonparty D, who is operating a gas station with the trade name of “Criju station,” and filed an application for payment order against the Plaintiff and Nonparty D for payment of oil price (Sriwon District Court Support 201j2857). On August 8, 2011, the above court issued a payment order to the effect that “The obligor jointly and severally held with the obligee an amount of KRW 41,913,938 per annum and the amount equivalent to 20% per annum from the day after the original copy of the instant payment order was served to the day of full payment, and the following demand procedure expenses

B. The determination of the above payment order was finalized on August 26, 201 for the Plaintiff, and the decision was finalized on January 28, 2012 after being referred to the litigation proceedings for Nonparty D, and was rendered on January 12, 2012 and became final and conclusive on January 28, 2012.

(Ground for recognition), Gap evidence 1 through 8 (including branch numbers), Eul evidence 1, witness D's testimony, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff merely lent his name in order for non-party D to substantially operate construction machinery with the name of "E", and the plaintiff does not bear the oil payment liability under the original payment order of this case, so compulsory execution based on the original copy of the payment order of this case should be denied.

B. We examine the following facts and circumstances, which are acknowledged by the respective descriptions of evidence Nos. 2 and 3, witness D’s testimony, and the purport of the entire pleadings, i.e., the following facts and circumstances, i., ① Nonparty D only entered Nonparty D as the debtor while preparing a letter of payment for the oil payment amount of KRW 45,080,037 against the defendant as of May 30, 2007, and the Plaintiff did not enter it as the debtor. ② In the amendment submitted by the Defendant in the process of the application for the payment order in this case, Nonparty D as the actual operator and the preparing letter of payment.

arrow