2. The Defendant’s loans to the Plaintiff at the District Court 2013j 3248.

A. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff and the wife C (hereinafter “Plaintiff, etc.”) lent the Plaintiff, etc. a total of KRW 21,00,000,000,000 on September 23, 2011, KRW 27,000,000 on September 27, 2011, KRW 3,000,000 on September 30, 201, KRW 3,000 on September 23, 201, KRW 5,00,000 on December 22, 201, KRW 21,00,000,000 on the construction site operated by the Plaintiff and KRW 38,00 on December 24, 201, KRW 21,030 on September 24, 201, KRW 200 on the interest rate of KRW 38,301,20 on the interest rate of KRW 301,203 (hereinafter “the instant payment order”).

B) On October 2, 2013, on which the Plaintiff resided in a foreign country, the instant payment order became final and conclusive on October 17, 2013 due to the lack of an objection filed by C, as the principal and the Plaintiff’s spouse, and the instant payment order became final and conclusive on October 17, 2013.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that, inasmuch as C, one’s former wife, borrowed the instant money from the defendant with gambling funds, etc., he/she did not borrow money from the defendant, compulsory execution based on the instant payment order should be denied.

In this regard, the defendant lent the money to the plaintiff through the plaintiff's wife C for the purpose of operating expenses of the building site and purchasing the children's house, which is the plaintiff's business, and requested the plaintiff to repay the money to the plaintiff's own. Thus, the plaintiff's assertion that he did not borrow the money from the above money is improper.

B. In a lawsuit of demurrer against a claim against a payment order for which judgment has become final, the extinction of the claim or the exercise of the claim after the issuance of the payment order.