1. The defendant's case for the price of goods against the plaintiff of Suwon District Court 2018Gaon 18252 rendered by Sungnam District Court 2018.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 1, 2018, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking payment of the price of goods with Suwon District Court 2018Gaon District Court 18252. On April 1, 2018, the Defendant rendered a decision of performance recommendation (hereinafter “decision of performance recommendation”) stating that “the Defendant (i) was served on the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant case”) for KRW 1,756,865, and the amount of KRW 6% per annum from April 18, 2013 to the delivery date of a copy of the complaint (i.e., November 11, 2018), and the amount of money calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from the next day to the full payment date.” The said decision of performance recommendation (hereinafter “the instant decision of performance recommendation”) became final and conclusive on November 27, 2018.

B. Based on the instant decision on performance recommendation, the Defendant received a decision to commence compulsory auction on December 14, 2018 by filing an application for compulsory auction of real estate owned by the Plaintiff.

(former District Court C). (c)

On June 13, 2019, the Plaintiff paid KRW 4,345,238 to the Defendant totaling KRW 2,366,377 based on the instant decision of performance recommendation, and KRW 1,978,861 in the execution cost of the compulsory auction of real estate, in order to prevent compulsory execution based on the instant decision of performance recommendation.

Accordingly, on June 13, 2019, the Defendant prepared a repayment certificate stating that “the amount claimed for the decision on performance recommendation of this case and the delay damages, and the execution cost of the real estate auction application case are fully repaid” and delivered it to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff’s debt based on the decision on performance recommendation of this case has ceased to exist due to repayment, and compulsory execution based on the decision on performance recommendation of this case shall not be permitted

3. The decision is delivered with the assent of all participating Justices, on the ground that the plaintiff's claim is well-grounded.