beta
Text
1. The defendant's compulsory execution against the plaintiff in this court No. 2018 tea 176 is denied.
2. This Court.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff, while living together with C, operated a restaurant with the trade name “D”.
B. On February 19, 2018, the Defendant filed an application against the Plaintiff for a payment order with the following grounds: (a) around February 19, 2018, the Defendant against the Plaintiff: (b) “The Plaintiff would pay the Plaintiff the purchase price of swine at the restaurant via C, one’s own wife; (c) would use only two to three days to return money; and (d) the Defendant would lend KRW 14,600,000 to the Plaintiff’s passbook; (c) however, the Plaintiff would have paid KRW 4,60,000 out of the above money and paid KRW 10,000,000 to the Defendant; and (d) on February 23, 2018, the court issued the payment order with the content that “the Plaintiff would pay the Defendant KRW 10,00,000,000 and delay damages therefrom,” which became final and conclusive at that time.
(hereinafter “instant payment order”). 【No dispute exists concerning the payment order of this case’s / [Grounds for recognition], entry of Gap evidence 1-1, 2, and Gap evidence 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The plaintiff's assertion was lent to C upon the request of C living together with C so that C can use the plaintiff's passbook. However, C immediately withdrawn 14,600,000 won to the defendant and used it for gambling in the name of the plaintiff, and since the plaintiff did not borrow or guarantee the above money from the defendant, compulsory execution based on the payment order of this case shall not be allowed. 2) The defendant's argument that C had been aware that C had been living together with the plaintiff for 10 years and operated for 3 years or more at the same time with the plaintiff, and C had requested C to lend money to the plaintiff as business fund to pay for the purchase price of the Korean swine as materials of the above restaurant and deposited KRW 14,60,000 from the plaintiff's passbook on behalf of the defendant.