beta
Text
1. The defendant's case was dated June 27, 2016, Asan District Court 2016 tea 472, Asan District Court 2010 against the plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On October 14, 2015, the Defendant: (a) received a claim attachment and collection order for KRW 21,808,598 out of the loans of KRW 30,000,00,00, from the loan of KRW 30,000,00 from the Chuncheon District Court (hereinafter “instant loan claims”); and (b) received a claim attachment and collection order for the said order on October 20, 2015, from the loan of KRW 30,805,00,000 from the loan of KRW 21,80,00,000, from the loan of KRW 201,80,000, from among the loan of KRW 30,000,00,000, from the ASEAN District Court 2012, ASEAN Branch Court 201
B. On June 24, 2016, the Defendant filed an application with the Plaintiff for a payment order claiming the collection amount of KRW 21,808,589 with the Daejeon District Court 2016Da472, the Asan City Court 2016, the Acheon District Court 2016, seeking damages for delay, and the Defendant received the payment order with the above court on June 27, 2016 (hereinafter “instant payment order”). The said payment order was finalized on July 15, 2016.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 7, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The loan certificate in the name of the Plaintiff, which is the basis of the Plaintiff’s claim for the instant loan, is forged, and there is no loan claim in Ghana against the Plaintiff.
Therefore, compulsory execution on the instant payment order premised on the existence of the instant loan claim cannot be permitted.
3. In the case of a final and conclusive payment order, the grounds for failure, invalidation, etc. arising prior to the issuance of the payment order may be asserted in the lawsuit of demurrer against the payment order with respect to the claim which became the cause of the claim of the payment order, and the burden of proof as to the grounds of objection in the lawsuit of objection shall also be in accordance with the principle of allocation of burden of proof in the general civil procedure.
Therefore, if the plaintiff asserts that the claim was not constituted by the defendant in the lawsuit of objection against the established payment order, the claim against the defendant.