청구이의
1. The Defendant’s payment order against the Plaintiff was based on the loan payment order in Seoul Central District Court No. 201 tea95705.
1. The facts falling under any of the following subparagraphs may be found either in dispute between the parties or in the entries in Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and Eul evidence 1 to 4, taking into account the whole purport of the pleadings:
The plaintiff was established on June 4, 2009, and the representative director was C at the time of establishment.
B. On April 14, 2009, the Defendant remitted KRW 64,000,000 to the account under the above C’s name. On September 28, 2009, the Defendant remitted KRW 20,000,000 to the account under the Plaintiff’s name, respectively. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 21714, Nov. 20, 2009; Presidential Decree No. 21706, Nov. 20, 2009>
C. On October 6, 2010, D, the Plaintiff’s representative director, as of October 6, 2010, borrowed KRW 450,000,00 from the Defendant and paid the interest to the Defendant on the last day of each month from October 31, 2010. The interest accrued prior to the opening of a bill, the amount of interest was KRW 10,000,000 per month, and the amount of interest paid in installments after the opening of a bill, and the amount of interest was agreed upon (hereinafter “the instant loan certificate”).
On November 25, 201, the Defendant applied for a payment order against the Plaintiff for a total of KRW 104,00,000 (=64,000,000 won KRW 20,000,000) that was remitted to the Plaintiff as Seoul Central District Court 201 tea 95705, (i.e., KRW 20,000,000). On December 6, 2011, the said court issued an annual payment order (hereinafter referred to as the instant payment order) from November 16, 201 to the delivery date of the authentic copy of the instant payment order, with the purport that the Plaintiff would pay 104,00,000 won to the Defendant at a rate of KRW 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment, and the said payment order became final and conclusive on November 28, 2011.
2. The parties' assertion
A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff's objection is limited to the objection period without knowing that the original copy of the payment order of this case was issued. 64,000,000 won deposited by the defendant to C (the defendant's wife) who was the representative director of the plaintiff was only part of the investment for the incorporation of the company, and 40,000 won paid to the plaintiff.