A. On September 13, 2012, from the Defendant’s husband C’s husband’s account to the Plaintiff’s account, KRW 200 million was transferred from October 10 of the same year, and KRW 1.4 million was transferred from the Plaintiff’s account to C’s account on October 11 of the same month and December 12 of the same month.

B. On May 14, 2014, the Defendant asserted that the above KRW 200 million was the Defendant’s loan to the Plaintiff, and filed an application for payment order against the Plaintiff for the remainder of KRW 95.6 million with this court. On May 16, 2014, the above court issued an order for payment on the 16th of the same month stating that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant KRW 95.6 million and the amount equivalent to KRW 20% per annum from the day following the service of the original copy of the payment order to the date of full payment” (hereinafter “instant payment order”). The instant payment order was issued for the same year.

6. 6. The decision was finalized as is.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 7, Gap evidence No. 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff borrowed KRW 20 million from the Plaintiff C, and repaid KRW 14.4 billion. The Plaintiff and C offset the remainder of the loan claims of the Plaintiff against the Plaintiff by KRW 95.6 million, and KRW 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 won.

Therefore, since the defendant's claim against the plaintiff does not exist, compulsory execution based on the payment order of this case should be rejected.

B. The Defendant lent KRW 200 million to the Plaintiff. If, however, C, other than the Defendant leased KRW 200 million to the Plaintiff, the Defendant acquired the remainder of the loan claim amounting to KRW 95.6 million from C on December 2, 2015, and notified the Plaintiff of the assignment of claims by receiving the delegation of the authority to notify the assignment of claims, and by delivering the briefs as of December 2, 2015 to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant's claim against the plaintiff exists.

3. In the case of a final and conclusive payment order, the payment order shall be issued for a claim which became the cause of the claim of the payment order.