1. The part of the instant lawsuit seeking the implementation of the procedure for cancellation of the decision on commencing auction shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff.

1. We examine whether the part of the instant lawsuit seeking the implementation of the registration of cancellation of the auction decision among the instant lawsuit seeking the implementation of the registration of cancellation of the auction decision is legitimate or lawful.

The cancellation of the registration of the decision on commencement of auction by the court's decision on commencement of auction shall be subject to an objection or cancellation against the decision on the commencement of auction by the court, and if the above decision becomes final and conclusive and the original copy of the decision is submitted to the court, the court shall request the cancellation registration of the decision on commencement of auction, and a registrar shall cancel the registration

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant for the cancellation of the registration of the above decision on commencing auction is unlawful and thus dismissed.

2. The part demanding the disapproval of compulsory execution due to the payment order of this case

A. The plaintiff asserts that since D's obligation to borrow loans against D was not jointly and severally guaranteed, the compulsory execution based on the payment order of this case shall not be permitted.

On April 4, 2017, the defendant asserts that on April 4, 2017, the plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed the debt of the loan amount of KRW 22 million against the defendant.

B. 1) The final and conclusive payment order has an executory power, and there is no res judicata, so the debtor on the payment order can assert the absence or invalidity of the claim on the grounds prior to the issuance of the payment order, and in a case where the debtor asserts the absence of a claim based on the payment order established, the creditor who applied for the payment order bears the burden of proving the existence or establishment of the claim. Therefore, the existence of the plaintiff's joint and several liability is presumed to be true if there is the signature or seal or seal of the principal or his representative (Article 358 of the Civil Procedure Act).