On February 20, 2014, Nonparty Hyundai Cargo Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) received a seizure and collection order against KRW 40,339,230 among the lease deposit claims that Nonparty B leased and possessed a building on the ground of Chuncheon City C on May 14, 2012 from the Plaintiff.

B. On June 30, 2015, the Defendant transferred the claim against the Plaintiff by the Nonparty Company based on the seizure and collection order.

C. On November 12, 2015, the Defendant was issued a payment order ordering the Plaintiff to pay KRW 40,339,230 according to the above seizure and collection order, and delay damages therefrom (hereinafter “instant payment order”). The instant payment order was finalized on December 8, 2015.

As of January 15, 2012, between the Plaintiff and Nonparty D, the monthly rent of KRW 110,000 was set up between the Plaintiff and Nonparty D, Chuncheon-si 3rd floor 305.

2. Determination

A. The plaintiff asserted that since the plaintiff did not enter into a lease contract with the non-party B, the plaintiff did not bear the obligation to return the lease deposit against the non-party B, and that compulsory execution based on the payment order of this case shall not be allowed.

B. In the case of a final and conclusive payment order, the grounds for failure or invalidation that occurred prior to the issuance of the payment order can be asserted in the lawsuit of objection against the payment order with respect to the claim that was the cause of the claim for the payment order, and the burden of proof as to the grounds of objection in the lawsuit of objection shall also be in accordance with the principle of burden of proof distribution in the general civil procedure.

Therefore, it is against the finalized payment order.