beta
Text
1. Of the instant claims, 10,199,204 won and the interest rate of 20% per annum from July 1, 2006 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
1. The parties' assertion
A. The Plaintiff asserted that his claim against the Defendant, as indicated in the following table, was transferred from the new card on June 21, 2013, and on June 28, 2013, the Plaintiff received respectively from the slot Card, and notified the Defendant of the assignment of claim on or around June 2014 upon delegation of the notification authority from each financial institution.
The credit card 4,589,481,481,394,317,983,792 on the 16,942,094,060,012 69,002,106 on the cards of 4,589,481, 394, 17,983,792
B. Defendant’s assertion 1) Of the claims asserted by the Plaintiff, the claim for the use price of the new card among the claims asserted by the Plaintiff, the sum of KRW 10,199,204 and KRW 6,742,890 for the use price of the old card prior to the merger of the former EL branch card is the same as the amount of KRW 10,742,890 for the use price of the former EL branch card. 2) The new card that had no conflict with the res judicata effect or interest in a lawsuit against the Plaintiff was filed against the Plaintiff and the decision of compulsory adjustment becomes final and conclusive around April 2006 by filing a lawsuit for the use price of the new card against the Plaintiff. The part of the claim for the use price of the former EL branch in the lawsuit in this case is contrary to res judicata effect, and the Plaintiff also sought compulsory execution by receiving the execution clause for the compulsory adjustment decision received by the former EL branch card.
Around June 2003, the Defendant’s delay in the payment of each credit card use price of some of the 3 claims was the claim corresponding to the old credit card use price of the acquisition price for which the Plaintiff seeks payment, which was finalized around April 2006, and the extinctive prescription was interrupted due to the Japanese court’s decision of compulsory adjustment 2006Gab262.
However, the remaining claim for the use of the former EL cards has expired since December 2003 when the defendant lost the benefit of time, or since June 7, 2007 when the plaintiff claimed as the due date, three to five years before the filing of the lawsuit in this case, and it has become a lot card.