logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2015.07.17 2014나14945
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. Basic facts

A. The Defendant filed an application with the Plaintiff for a payment order seeking payment of KRW 46,056,043 as Busan District Court Decision 2008 tea 9057, the Defendant asserted that “the Plaintiff was liable for each of the above card companies by using a foreign exchange card, Samsung Card, and National Card, to pay KRW 46,056,043 in total, and the Defendant acquired the Plaintiff’s claim against each of the above card companies (hereinafter “the claim”).

B. On May 14, 2008, the above court issued an order for payment (hereinafter “instant order for payment”) stating that “the plaintiff shall pay to the defendant 46,056,043 won and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 17% per annum from May 9, 2008 to the date of full payment and 22,980 won per annum from May 9, 2008 to the date of full payment.” The order was finalized on June 3, 2008.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap 1's evidence, purport of whole pleading

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. In the case of a final and conclusive payment order, the grounds for failure or invalidation, etc. arising prior to the issuance of the payment order may be asserted in a lawsuit of objection against the payment order (see Articles 58(3) and 44(2) of the Civil Execution Act). The burden of proof as to the grounds for objection in a lawsuit of objection shall also be in accordance with the principle of allocation of burden of proof in general civil procedure.

Therefore, in case where the plaintiff claims that the defendant's claim was not established in a lawsuit claiming objection against the final payment order, the plaintiff is liable to prove the cause of the claim to the defendant, and where the plaintiff claims the fact that the claim was invalid or extinguished as a false declaration of prior agreement, and the plaintiff claims the fact that the cause of the claim falls under disability

arrow