Gunsan Attorney Consultation | Full Grant for a Client Who Requested a Collection Claim Suit

Even after obtaining a final judgment in one's favor through a monetary claim suit, such as a claim for the return of a loan or the price of goods, if the debtor does not voluntarily make repayment, there is no choice but to resolve the matter through compulsory execution.

At this point, collection may be made through the attachment and auction of property such as real estate held in the debtor's name, but it is also possible to attach and collect a claim that the debtor holds against a third-party debtor.

If, despite an attachment and collection order having been obtained, the third-party debtor refuses to pay the amount to the creditor, the creditor may file a ‘collection claim suit’ against the third-party debtor.

This collection claim suit is a civil suit that only the collection holder may file.

According to Supreme Court precedent, in a collection suit the attaching creditor may claim payment directly to itself (direct claim), but when creditors compete, it may also seek a deposit (suit seeking a deposit).

Even in a suit seeking a deposit, this is limited to an attaching creditor who has obtained a collection order, and care should be taken because another attaching creditor who has not obtained a collection order lacks standing as a plaintiff.

The Gunsan attorney argued that, after the collection order in this case, A continued to work at the defendant's company yet did not pay the amount to the client.

The Gunsan attorney closely reviewed the written decision on the attachment and collection of the claim issued by the court and emphasized that the defendant had an obligation to comply with the court's order.

The Gunsan attorney calculated in detail the loss the client suffered because the defendant did not perform the obligation and argued the amount of damage.

The Gunsan attorney argued for the amount of 90 million won to be paid in this suit, based on the first collection order and the second collection order.

The Gunsan attorney emphasized that the client was suffering greatly from a debt that had gone unresolved for a long time and requested a swift resolution of the case.