Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1. Purport of the claim.

A. In full view of the statement and the purport of the whole argument as to Gap evidence No. 1, the plaintiff applied for a loan payment order against the defendant as Seoul Western District Court Decision 2009Da8749, Aug. 18, 2009, and the above court received a payment order (hereinafter "the above payment order of this case") stating that "the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 10 million won and the amount equivalent to 20% per annum from the next day of service of the original copy of the payment order to the day of complete payment" (hereinafter "the above payment order of this case"). The above payment order of August 24, 2009 was served on the defendant, and the payment order of September 8, 2009 was finalized because the defendant did not raise any objection.

B. According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff 10,000,000 won and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from September 8, 2009 to the day of complete payment, which the plaintiff seeks from September 8, 2009 after the delivery date of the original copy of the payment order, according to the payment order of this case which became final and conclusive, barring special circumstances. The plaintiff has the interest to file the lawsuit of this case for the interruption of the prescription period of the above

2. As to the defendant's argument, the defendant asserts that there is no money borrowed from the plaintiff, and that there is no fact that the plaintiff prepared a loan certificate as asserted by the plaintiff at the time.

On the other hand, the defendant's above reasons cannot be the subject of the examination of the lawsuit of this case, which was brought for the interruption of the prescription of the claim based on the payment order of this case finalized.

I have different views.

However, the following circumstances revealed in the records of the instant payment order, namely, the attached documents at the time of the instant payment order, and the Defendant’s objection to the instant payment order was not raised and confirmed as it is, and the Plaintiff’s claims based on the instant payment order are seized by the Seoul Western District Court 2018TTT1814.