1. The defendant's order for the payment of loans to the defendant was issued by the Cheongju District Court of the 2012 World War 186.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 26, 2012, the Defendant, at the Defendant’s Internet website, set KRW 10,000,000 as an overdue interest rate of KRW 38.99% and lent to the Plaintiff via the Plaintiff’s verification procedure with the Plaintiff’s authorized certificate.

B. On October 9, 2012, 2012, the Defendant filed an application with the Plaintiff for a payment order claiming the payment of the above loan with the Cheongju District Court 2012 next to 186, Cheongju District Court 2012, and this Court issued the payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) stating that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant the amount of KRW 10,780,534 and the amount of KRW 10,000,00 per annum from September 16, 2012 to the date of full payment” (hereinafter “the instant payment order”). The instant payment order became final and conclusive on October 26, 2012.

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

2. The plaintiff asserted that, since the plaintiff did not borrow the above loan from the defendant, compulsory execution based on the payment order of this case should not be permitted, considering the whole purport of the argument as a whole, it is reasonable to view that Eul, who is the plaintiff, stolen the plaintiff's authorized certificate without the right of representation from the plaintiff, and borrowed the above loan from the defendant. Thus, the defendant's compulsory execution based on the payment order of this case against the plaintiff should be rejected.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.