The Defendant filed an application against the Plaintiff for a payment order seeking the payment of the agreed amount under the Chuncheon District Court’s 2018 tea 1407, and this Court issued the payment order on March 21, 2018 (hereinafter “instant payment order”).

The instant payment order was served on the Plaintiff on March 26, 2018, and became final and conclusive on April 10, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] The defendant asserted the purport of Gap evidence No. 1 and the whole argument as to the purport of the plaintiff's argument, the defendant asserted that the defendant and Eul District Housing Association Promotion Committee (hereinafter "Promotion Committee of this case") concluded on January 25, 2017 are liable for the refund of agency expenses to the defendant as the contract for membership joining entered into on July 29, 2017 between the defendant and Eul District Housing Association Promotion Committee was rescinded. The plaintiff who entered into the Promotion Committee of this case and the agency service contract of this case was liable for the refund of agency expenses. The payment order of this case was finalized as

However, the obligation to refund agency expenses due to the cancellation of the agreement on membership agreements asserted by the Defendant is not the obligation to be borne by the Plaintiff, but the obligation to be borne by the instant promotion committee.

Since there is no claim under the payment order of this case, compulsory execution based thereon shall be dismissed.

Judgment

A. In the case of a final and conclusive payment order, the grounds for failure or invalidation that occurred prior to the issuance of the payment order can be asserted in the lawsuit of objection against the payment order, and the burden of proof as to the grounds for 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 a lawsuit claiming objection against the established payment order, the defendant is liable to prove the cause of the claim.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da12852, Jun. 24, 2010). B.

The Defendant issued the instant payment order against the Plaintiff.