(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.06.16 2015가합204476

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.06.16 2015가합204476

추심금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendants are creditors of the non-party company who purchased apartment from the non-party company DS Construction (hereinafter “non-party company”), and the Plaintiff is the creditor of the non-party company.

B. On August 26, 2005, Defendant B paid all the remainder of KRW 223,60,000,000 after having purchased the 559,000,000 of the purchase price from the non-party company of Daegu Suwon-gu D apartment 101,601, and then having paid the down payment and the intermediate payment. Defendant C did not pay the remainder of KRW 223,60,000 from the non-party company on December 28, 2005. Defendant C paid all the down payment and the intermediate payment after having purchased the above 101,200,000 won from the non-party company, but did not pay the remainder of KRW 262,00,00.

C. Based on the original copy of the payment order in the Daegu District Court case 201Hu582, the Plaintiff requested the issuance of a seizure and collection order against the Defendants of the non-party company on June 5, 2015 upon the non-party company’s request for the seizure and collection order against the Defendants of the remainder payment claim (hereinafter “each remainder payment claim in this case”). The above order was served on the Defendants on June 9, 2015.

Around March 2008, the non-party company entered into a contract with the transfer of the claim for the remainder payment of each of the instant claims to the non-party company. On April 10, 2008, the non-party company sent the notice of the assignment of claims to the Defendants on April 10, 2008, and the above notice reached the Defendants around that time.

【Non-contentious facts, Gap’s evidence 1, 2, Eul’s evidence 1 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), 2-1, Eul’s evidence 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the facts as seen earlier prior to the occurrence of the duty of collection prohibition, the Plaintiff received a seizure and collection order with respect to the claim for the remainder payment of each of the instant claims, barring any special circumstance, the Defendants are liable to pay the remainder to the Plaintiff.

B. Determination as to the Defendants’ assertion is made by the Defendants.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2015.08.27 2011가합13357

-전주지방법원 2016.06.22 2015가단29666

-서울남부지방법원 2017.01.19 2015가단48836

-창원지방법원진주지원 2015.10.06 2014가단7526

-의정부지방법원 2019.10.24 2019나204167