The defendant's order of payment is based on the order of payment on November 10, 201 to the defendant's Changwon District Court for the plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On November 10, 2011, the Defendant filed an application against the Plaintiff for a payment order with the Changwon District Court Msan Branch Branch No. 201j2832, and on November 10, 201, the Defendant issued a payment order with the purport that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant 3,696,000 won and the amount equivalent to 20% per annum from the day after the original copy of the payment order was served to the day of full payment (hereinafter “instant payment order”), which became final and conclusive on November 29, 2011.

B. On September 12, 2013, the Suwon District Court rendered a decision to commence rehabilitation procedures by 2013 Gohap80 with respect to the Plaintiff. A decision to authorize the rehabilitation plan was made on May 20, 2014, and the rehabilitation procedures were completed on December 31, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 7, purport of the whole pleadings

2. A rehabilitation creditor who intends to participate in rehabilitation procedures under Articles 148 and 152 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter “Rehabilitation Act”) shall file a report on the rehabilitation claim. The rehabilitation claims listed in the list under Article 151 of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act are deemed to have been reported. Barring any special circumstance, the rehabilitation claims not reported as above shall be forfeited when a decision to authorize the rehabilitation plan is made pursuant to Article 251 of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Da78215, May 12, 2016). On the contrary, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant’s claims based on the instant payment order against the Plaintiff constitute the rehabilitation claims, and there is no fact that they are entered in the list of rehabilitation creditors or reported as the rehabilitation claims, and no special circumstance exists to deem that the Defendant’s claims based on the payment order against the Plaintiff were forfeited at the time when a decision to authorize the rehabilitation plan against the Plaintiff under Article 251 of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act was made.

For this, the defendant did not know that rehabilitation procedures for the plaintiff are in progress, and the list of rehabilitation creditors is in progress.