Of the instant lawsuit, the Defendant’s assertion against the Plaintiff.

2. We examine ex officio determination as to whether the part of the instant lawsuit seeking the denial of compulsory execution with respect to KRW 174,766,174 is legitimate or not.

After compulsory execution based on executive titles has been completed as a whole, there is no benefit to seek non-permission of compulsory execution by an action of demurrer (see Supreme Court Decision 96Da52489, Apr. 25, 1997). In a case where compulsory execution against a part of the amount on executive titles is completed, there is no benefit to bring an action to seek non-permission of compulsory execution by an action of demurrer, and such part is dismissed, and the propriety of the claim on the merits should be deliberated and decided only on the part on which the execution has not been completed.

(2) According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the following facts: (a) there is no dispute between the parties to the instant case; or (b) Gap evidence No. 3; and (c) the principal and interest accrued from the instant payment order was KRW 180,779,200 as of August 29, 2018; and (d) the defendant completed the execution of KRW 174,76,174 in the Plaintiff’s deposit and credit card bonds, etc. according to the instant payment order’s seizure and collection order according to the above order of seizure and collection. Accordingly, compulsory execution on KRW 174,766,174 out of the title based on the instant payment order of this case had already been completed according to the above seizure and collection order of claims, and thus, there is no interest in the Plaintiff’s lawsuit seeking compulsory execution against KRW 174,766,174 as to KRW 174,66,174.

Therefore, among the instant lawsuits, KRW 174,766,174, among the compulsory execution based on the instant payment order.