청구이의
1. No. 830 of 2009, a deed drawn up by the Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff on November 20, 2009 by the name of the law firm mining name of the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. On November 20, 2009, in the presence of the Plaintiff and the Defendant, a notary public signed a notarial deed under a monetary loan agreement (refer to the evidence A; hereinafter “instant notarial deed”) with No. 830 at the e-document 830, 2009 at the e-mail office of law firm. The main contents are as follows.
On November 20, 2009, the Defendant decided 15,000,000 won to the Plaintiff as the due date of November 20, 201 and lent it to the Plaintiff at 30% per annum (payment from December 20, 2009).
When the defendant fails to perform his monetary obligation under this contract, the defendant recognized that there is no objection even if compulsory execution is conducted immediately.
B. On September 22, 2015, the Defendant received KRW 4,000,000 as to the instant loan, respectively, and issued a receipt that received KRW 1,100,000 as part of the principal on January 2, 2016, respectively.
(see Evidence A 3-1, 2). (c)
Based on the instant notarial deed, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to issue a collection order on October 2, 2015, with the amount claimed as Seoul Southern District Court 2015TTTT16407, which is “20,761,643 won” as the amount claimed as Seoul Southern District Court 2015TTTT1607, and “the collection order” is “the collection order in this case.
Upon receipt of an order, it was served on the garnishee on October 7, 2015.
2. The allegations and judgment of the parties
A. Determination as to the cause of the instant claim 1: (a) the amount claimed for the collection order of this case exceeds KRW 15,00,000 and KRW 5,761,643 of the loan principal of this case from December 20, 2009 to November 20, 201; (b) the Defendant paid KRW 11,10,000,000 as the loan principal of this case; (c) additionally repaid KRW 4,00,000 on September 22, 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that the amount claimed for the collection order of this case remains KRW 5,661,643,00 of the loan principal of this case; and (d) sought compulsory execution as to the portion exceeding this money.
The lawsuit of demurrer shall have the title of execution on the ground that the debtor raises an objection against the claim indicated in the title of execution.