NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

CHAVEZ, J.

Plaintiff and appellant Pacific Systems (plaintiff) appeals from a postjudgment order granting a motion by defendants and respondents Four Down, Inc. doing business as Giant Skateboard Distribution, Paul Schmitt, Jason Speer, Anthony Froude, Frank Jalufka, and New Deal Skateboard Products, Inc. (defendants) to compel plaintiff to execute and file an acknowledgment of full satisfaction of judgment and requiring plaintiff to pay attorney fees and a statutory penalty under Code of Civil Procedure section 724.050, subdivisions (b) and (e).1 Plaintiff contends the trial court erred by compelling it to execute and file an acknowledgment of full satisfaction of judgment because the amount tendered by defendants did not include prejudgment attorney fees that were the subject of a then pending appeal, or postjudgment fees and costs plaintiff might be entitled to recover as the prevailing party in that appeal. Plaintiff maintains that a partial satisfaction of judgment under section 724.110 is all that defendants were entitled to seek. We agree and reverse the trial court's order.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff filed a complaint against defendants for breach of a commercial lease that contained a contractual attorney fees provision. Plaintiff subsequently accepted defendants' section 998 offer to pay plaintiff $175,000 plus reasonable attorney fees to be determined by the trial court. The trial court entered judgment in the amount of $175,000 based on the section 998 offer, plus costs and attorney fees in an amount to be determined by a subsequent noticed motion.

Plaintiff filed a motion for attorney fees seeking $115,955 in fees for work performed by William G. Wells, an attorney who was also plaintiff's general manager, and fees for work performed by an outside law firm named Christa & Jackson. The trial court awarded plaintiff fees for Christa & Jackson but denied the motion for attorney fees paid to Wells. Plaintiff appealed the order denying attorney fees for Wells.2

While that appeal was pending, defendants tendered to plaintiff a check for $185,000, which plaintiff accepted in partial satisfaction of the judgment. Defendants then tendered a second check to plaintiff to satisfy the balance of the judgment as it then existed and demanded under section 724.050 that plaintiff execute and deliver a full satisfaction of judgment within 15 days. Plaintiff refused to do so.

Defendants filed a motion to compel plaintiff to accept a check for the balance of the judgment and to execute a full satisfaction of judgment. In its opposition, plaintiff claimed it could not execute a full satisfaction of judgment because doing so would jeopardize its pending appeal and its entitlement to any attorney fees and costs incurred in enforcing the judgment. To address these concerns, defendants agreed in writing that plaintiff would not waive any rights to the attorney fees on appeal by accepting a check for the balance of the judgment and signing a full satisfaction of judgment. Defendants also sent plaintiff a modified satisfaction of judgment form, which stated that full satisfaction of the judgment was "Subject to attorney fees plaintiff may recover on appeal and in [a] Memorandum of Costs relating to enforcement efforts." Plaintiff refused to accept the check or sign the satisfaction of judgment form.

The trial court granted defendants' motion and ordered defendants to tender to plaintiff a new check in the amount of the then outstanding balance of the judgment and ordered plaintiff to accept the check and to execute and file an acknowledgment of full satisfaction of judgment. The trial court further ordered plaintiff to pay defendants $440 in attorney fees and $100 in statutory penalties. This appeal followed.

DISCUSSION

I. Standard of Review

"The interpretation of a statute is a question of law, which we review de novo. [Citation.]" (Jhaveri v. Teitelbaum (2009) 176 Cal.App.4th 740, 749.) To the extent the instant appeal involves the interpretation of statutes governing satisfaction of judgment and acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment, our review is de novo. (Ibid.) We review the trial court's order requiring plaintiff to pay attorney fees and a statutory penalty under the abuse of discretion standard. (See In re Marriage of Corona (2009) 172 Cal.App.4th 1205, 1225-1226.)

II. Preliminary Principles

We begin our analysis with an overview of judgments, costs, attorney fees, and the enforcement and satisfaction of judgments.

A. Judgment

"`A judgment is the final determination of the rights of the parties in an action or proceeding.' [Citation.]" (Lucky United Properties Investment, Inc. v. Lee (2010) 185 Cal.App.4th 125, 136 (Lucky).) "The principal amount of a judgment is the amount of any damages awarded, plus any costs (including attorney fees) to which the prevailing party may be entitled, less any amounts paid by the judgment debtor. (§ 680.300.)" (Lucky, at p. 137.)

B. Prejudgment Costs

A prevailing party may recover certain costs incurred in the litigation, including attorney fees, if authorized by contract, statute, or law. (§§ 1032, 1033.5.) When fees or costs are included in the judgment, but the amount of the award is to be determined at a later time, the court clerk enters the costs on the judgment after the amount is determined, and the amount of the cost award is incorporated into the judgment. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule, 3.1700(b)(4); Lucky, supra, 185 Cal.App.4th at p. 137.) "Interest at the rate of 10 percent per annum accrues on the unpaid principal amount of the judgment (§ 685.010), including the amount of the cost award and attorney fees award (§ 680.300), as of the date of judgment entry (§ 685.020, subd. (a))." (Lucky, supra, at pp. 137-138.)

C. Postjudgment Enforcement Costs

In addition to prejudgment attorney fees and costs awarded as the result of prevailing in an action, a judgment creditor may also be awarded postjudgment costs incurred in enforcing the judgment. (§§ 685.040, 685.070; Lucky, supra, 185 Cal.App.4th at p. 138.) Such postjudgment enforcement costs may include contractual attorney fees if the underlying judgment includes an award of such fees to the judgment creditor. (§§ 685.040, 1033.5)3

When awarded, postjudgment enforcement costs become part of the principal amount of the judgment. (§§ 685.070, subd. (d), 685.090, subd. (a).) Interest accrues on postjudgment enforcement costs at the rate of 10 percent per annum. (§ 685.010, subd. (a).)

D. Appellate Court Order of Costs on Appeal

"If an appeal is taken from the judgment, the party prevailing in the Court of Appeal is usually entitled to costs on appeal. [Citation.] The award of costs is included in the remittitur, although the amount of the award is determined in the trial court. [Citation.] These costs, however, are not added to the trial court judgment, but constitute a separate judgment. [Citations.] Interest thereon begins to run from the date of the entry of the trial court's award. [Citation.]" (Lucky, supra, 185 Cal.App.4th at p. 138.)

E. Allocation of Payments on Judgment

"Payment on a judgment is allocated first to accrued interest on the principal amount, and then to the principal. [Citations.]" (Lucky, supra, 185 Cal.App.4th at p. 139.)

F. Satisfaction of Judgment

"The amount required to satisfy a money judgment is the total amount of the judgment, plus costs added after judgment (including attorney fees), plus accrued interest on the judgment, less payments and any amounts no longer enforceable. (§ 695.210.) Alternatively, a money judgment will be deemed satisfied if there is an agreement by the parties that a tendered amount is sufficient. [Citation.]" (Lucky, supra, 185 Cal.App.4th at p. 139, fn omitted.)

When a money judgment is satisfied in full, the judgment creditor must file with the court an acknowledgement of the satisfaction of the judgment. (§ 724.030.) The judgment debtor may serve a demand on the judgment creditor to comply with this requirement, and if the judgment creditor fails to do so within 15 days after receipt of the demand, the judgment debtor may file a noticed motion with the court to require the judgment creditor's compliance. (§ 724.050, subds. (b), (d).) If the judgment creditor fails to comply with the demand without just cause, it is liable to the judgment debtor for damages and a statutory penalty of $100. (§ 724.050, subd. (e).) In addition, the court must award reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party. (§ 724.080.) (Lucky, supra, 185 Cal.App.4th at pp. 139-140.)

When a judgment has been partially satisfied, the judgment debtor may demand, under section 724.110, that the judgment creditor executes a partial satisfaction of judgment within 15 days of the demand. (§ 724.110, subd. (a).) If the judgment creditor does not comply with the demand within the time allowed, the judgment debtor may apply to the court for an order requiring the judgment creditor to comply with the demand. (§ 724.110, subd. (b).) Unlike the procedure for compelling the judgment creditor to deliver an acknowledgment of full satisfaction of judgment, however, section 724.110 does not provide a sanction for failure to comply with the demand, or for attorney fees to the prevailing party. (Cal. Law Revision Com. com., 17 West's Ann. Code Civ. Proc. (2009 ed.) foll. § 724.110, p. 551.)

G. Effect of Satisfaction of Judgment

Collecting on a judgment and executing and filing a satisfaction of judgment can bar a subsequent appeal from the judgment. In general, it is inconsistent to accept the benefits of a judgment and then prosecute an appeal from that judgment. (Heacock v. Ivorette-Texas, Inc. (1993) 20 Cal.App.4th 1665, 1670 (Heacock).) Accepting the benefits of a judgment will waive an appeal unless an exception applies. (Lee v. Brown (1976) 18 Cal.3d 110, 114.) One such exception is when the "appellant is concededly entitled to the accepted benefits, and his right to them is unaffected by the outcome of the case on appeal. [Citation.]" (Id. at p. 115.) Another exception occurs when "the appellant is simply attempting to augment the judgment and the relief sought would not jeopardize the amount already collected. [Citations.]" (Heacock, supra, at p. 1670.)

Satisfaction in full of a judgment precludes recovery of postjudgment costs and attorney fees that were not requested before the judgment was satisfied. Under section 685.080, postjudgment costs and attorney fees sought must be pursued by noticed motion "made before the judgment is satisfied in full, but no later than two years after the costs have been incurred."4

III. The Trial Court Erred by Ordering a Full Satisfaction of Judgment

The trial court erred by ordering plaintiff to execute and file an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment pursuant to section 724.060. The amount required to satisfy a money judgment is the total amount of the judgment entered, plus costs added after judgment, including attorney fees and postjudgment interest as it accrues. (§ 695.210.) Although defendants tendered payment of the amount of the judgment entered, their tender did not include prejudgment attorney fees that were the subject of a pending appeal, or any postjudgment enforcement costs plaintiff would be entitled to receive if plaintiff prevailed on the appeal. Defendants conceded that plaintiff would be entitled to such fees and costs if the appeal was successful.

The satisfaction of judgment form propounded by defendants evidences an intent to effect a partial satisfaction, rather than a full satisfaction of the judgment. That form contains interlineated language, added by defendants, stating that satisfaction of the judgment was "Subject to attorney fees plaintiff may recover on appeal and in [a] Memorandum of Costs relating to enforcement efforts." Had the parties agreed to a full satisfaction of the judgment, plaintiff would be unable to recover the postjudgment enforcement costs that defendants expressly agreed plaintiff would be entitled to collect.5 Section 685.080 allows a judgment creditor to recover such costs only "by noticed motion . . . made before the judgment is satisfied in full . . . ." (§ 685.080, subd. (a), italics added.)6

In light of the parties' express intent to effect a partial, rather than a full satisfaction of judgment, the trial court erred by ordering plaintiff to execute a full satisfaction of the judgment pursuant to section 724.060.

IV. The Statutory Penalty and Attorney Fees Award Must be Reversed

Defendants were not entitled to demand a full satisfaction of judgment, and the trial court erred by ordering plaintiff to execute and file an acknowledgment of satisfaction pursuant to section 724.060. Accordingly, the trial court's order requiring plaintiff to pay a statutory penalty and defendants' attorney fees under section 724.050 for failing to comply with defendants' demand for a full satisfaction of judgment must also be reversed.

V. Plaintiff is Entitled to its Attorney Fees

Section 724.080 mandates an award of reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party in a proceeding seeking full satisfaction of a judgment: "In an action or proceeding maintained pursuant to this chapter, the court shall award reasonable attorney's fees to the prevailing party." (§ 724.080.) Plaintiff, as the prevailing party in defendants' motion to compel plaintiff to execute and file a satisfaction of judgment pursuant to section 724.050, is therefore entitled to an award of reasonable attorney fees.

DISPOSITION

The trial court's order compelling plaintiff to execute and file an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment pursuant to section 724.060 and requiring plaintiff to pay a $100 statutory penalty and attorney fees under section 724.050 is reversed. The matter is remanded to the trial court to determine the amount of attorney fees to be awarded to plaintiff under section 724.080. Plaintiff is awarded its costs on appeal.

BOREN, P. J. and ASHMANN-GERST, J., concurs.