청구이의
1. Compulsory execution against the Defendant’s Plaintiff based on the payment order in the instant case for the purchase price of goods at the court 2017 tea80.
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendant is a person who runs wholesale and retail business of clothing, etc., and the Plaintiff has traded the Defendant and clothing, etc. on credit from June 2016.
B. On April 18, 2017, the Defendant filed an application with the Plaintiff for a payment order: (a) from June 19, 2016 to September 6, 2016, to “from June 19, 2016 to September 6, 2016, the outstanding amount of KRW 13,083,00,000, and delay damages therefrom,” with the Plaintiff.
C. The plaintiff paid 13,083,00 won to the defendant and 15% interest per annum from the day after the original copy of the instant payment order was served to the day of full payment. The plaintiff paid 13,083,000 won to the defendant.
A) The instant payment order was issued on May 5, 2017, and the instant payment order became final and conclusive on May 5, 2017. 【The fact that there was no dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap evidence No. 1, and the purport of the entire
2. The parties' assertion
A. Since the plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff is entitled to pay the outstanding amount to the defendant does not exist, compulsory execution based on the payment order of this case shall be dismissed.
B. The Defendant asserted that the Defendant supplied 74,472,300 won to the Plaintiff on credit. However, the Defendant received 19,725,800 won out of the price, and received the return of the product amounting to KRW 39,398,40, and thus, the Defendant still remains the outstanding claim amounting to KRW 15,348,100.
3. In the case of a final and conclusive payment order, the grounds for failure, invalidation, etc. arising prior to the issuance of the payment order may be asserted in the lawsuit of objection against the payment order with respect to the claim which became the cause of the claim of 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, if the plaintiff asserts that the claim was not constituted by the defendant in the lawsuit of objection against the established payment order, the cause of the claim shall be the defendant.