A. On July 25, 2016, with the commission of the Plaintiff and the Defendant, a notary public set up a notarial deed of a monetary consumer loan agreement with the effect that: (a) the Defendant lent KRW 60 million to the Plaintiff without interest or delay damages; and (b) the Plaintiff was to pay KRW 300,000 from September 5, 2016 to September 2016 (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”).

B. After the preparation of the above notarial deed, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant a total of KRW 5,100,000 per 17 times from October 31, 2016 to February 5, 2017, in total, KRW 5,100,000 of the principal.

C. On September 23, 2019, the Defendant filed an application against the Plaintiff for a payment order seeking a loan pursuant to the instant authentic deed with the Incheon District Court Decision 2019Gu4527, and on September 23, 2019, the said court issued a payment order ordering the Plaintiff to pay KRW 60 million to the Defendant for delayed payment calculated at the rate of 12% per annum from the day following the delivery of the payment order to the day of full payment, and for delayed payment, KRW 65,100 per annum from the day of the delivery of the payment order to the day of full payment (hereinafter “instant payment order”). The said payment order became final and conclusive

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 15, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. On February 15, 2018, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant met the full amount of the obligation under the instant payment order, and thus, compulsory execution based on the instant payment order should be denied.

B. 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. The burden of proof as to the grounds for objection should comply with the principle of allocation of burden of proof in general civil procedure.

Therefore, if the plaintiff asserts that his claim was not established in a lawsuit of demurrer against the established payment order, the defendant shall be the defendant.