청구이의
1. The Defendant’s payment order against the Plaintiff was based on the payment order for unjust enrichment case against the Seoul Southern District Court 2013 tea3818.
1. Basic facts
A. A. Around February 28, 2013, the Defendant filed an application with the Plaintiff for a payment order claiming payment of unjust enrichment amounting to KRW 91,560,000 and delay damages, asserting that, on December 1, 2008, the Plaintiff transferred the loan claim against C to the Defendant on December 1, 2008, and that, after receiving the claim amount from C, it did not return it to the Defendant.
B. Accordingly, on April 23, 2013, the Seoul Southern District Court issued a payment order ordering the Plaintiff to pay the above amount (hereinafter “instant payment order”) to the Defendant. On May 2, 2013, the said payment order was served on the Plaintiff, but became final and conclusive on May 17, 2013 due to the Plaintiff’s failure to raise an objection.
[Reasons for Recognition] Entry No. 5 Eul and the purport of the whole pleading
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff asserted that, although the Defendant did not have taken over the claim against C from the Plaintiff, compulsory execution based on the instant payment order should be denied. As to this, the Defendant lent a total of KRW 18 million to the Plaintiff by October 2008. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff transferred the claim against C to the Defendant in lieu of paying the above loan amount.
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 a lawsuit of demurrer against the payment order. The burden of proof as to the grounds for objection in the lawsuit of objection is in accordance with the principle of burden of proof distribution in the general civil procedure. Therefore, in the lawsuit of objection against the final and conclusive payment order, where the plaintiff asserts that the defendant's claim was not established in the lawsuit of objection against the final and conclusive payment order, the defendant is liable to prove the grounds for objection
(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Da12852 Decided June 24, 2010, etc.).