beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.11.30 2018가단17460

청구이의

Text

1. The Defendant’s payment order for the purchase price for the goods (No. 2018.6292) against the Plaintiff was issued.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. From October 2017 to January 2018, the Defendant filed an application for payment order with the Suwon District Court No. 2018 tea6292 against the Plaintiff and B, on the ground of the claim that the amount of goods that had not been received after supplied special lectures to C (Gu: D) operated by the Plaintiff and B as the partnership business reaches KRW 62,241,586.

B. On May 8, 2018, the above court issued a payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) stating that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant 62,241,586 won and the amount calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from the day following the date of service of the original copy of the instant payment order until the day of full payment.” The instant payment order was finalized on June 8, 2018.

C. Based on the instant payment order, the Defendant applied for a compulsory auction to Suwon District Court E for the real estate owned by the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 4 and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. In the case of a payment order for which legal principles have become final and conclusive, the grounds for failure or invalidation, etc. arising prior to the issuance of the payment order may 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 general civil procedure.

Therefore, in a lawsuit of demurrer against a claim for a final and conclusive payment order, where the plaintiff claims that the defendant's claim had not been constituted, the defendant is liable to prove the cause of the claim, and where the plaintiff claims facts that fall under the disability or cause of extinction of the right, such as the invalidity or extinguishment of the claim as a false declaration of prior agreement

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Da12852 Decided June 24, 2010). B.

Judgment

The entries and arguments in Gap evidence 5-1 to 3 shall be made.