logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원강릉지원 2020.01.21 2019가단35083
추심금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. According to Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (Partial number omitted), the plaintiff has a claim against D Regional Housing Association (hereinafter "debtor Association") for unjust enrichment amounting to KRW 76.8 million and delay damages, and the plaintiff was issued a seizure and collection order for KRW 19,920,763 among the deposit claims that the debtor association has against the defendant as of March 5, 2019, as of Gangwon-gu District Court Decision 2019Tlle-20565, March 5, 2019. The above collection order was delivered to the defendant on March 7, 2019, and the fact that the debtor association has a deposit claim exceeding the above amount against the defendant is not in dispute between the parties, barring special circumstances, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the collection amount of KRW 19,920,763 and delay damages calculated from March 8, 2019 after the date of service of the collection order.

2. As to the defendant's defense, since the defendant defenses that the defendant offsets his/her deposit claims against the debtor union with claims, such as the principal and interest of loans, etc. which the defendant has against the debtor union, the defendant loaned 4 billion won to the debtor union which greatly exceeds the deposit amount of the debtor union on November 7, 2017 in full view of the respective statements and the purport of the whole pleadings, it can be recognized that the defendant extended the loan amount of 4 billion won to the debtor union on March 5, 2019, which is before the defendant received a collection order, and that the repayment period of the above loan claims has arrived at around March 5, 2019, respectively. In the offset, not only where both claims have become due but also where the repayment period

Even if it is possible to waive the benefit of the time limit (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Da73326, Jun. 13, 2003). Thus, the Defendant’s claim on the loan and the Defendant’s deposit claim on the debtor association whose maturity date has not yet arrived have already been set-off before the delivery of the collection order, and the instant claim containing the Defendant’s declaration of set-off on October 15, 2019.

arrow