1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. On April 19, 2019, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking payment of goods with Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2018Gaso5952, and on April 19, 2019, the judgment of the court below that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant 5,906,200 won and interest calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from February 9, 2019 to the date of full payment” (hereinafter “instant judgment”), which became final and conclusive on May 10, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Eul evidence 1-1 and 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion asserts that the Plaintiff traded with the Defendant until April 18, 2019, and that prior to the instant judgment, the Defendant’s employees D had already been paid the full amount of the goods and had no outstanding amount, and thus, the executory power of the instant judgment should be excluded.

3. An objection to a claim should have arisen after the pleadings have been concluded (Article 44(2) of the Civil Execution Act). In a case where an executive title, which is the object of an objection to a claim, is a final and conclusive judgment, the reason should arise after the closure of pleadings in the relevant lawsuit. The circumstances that arise earlier should not be deemed as the grounds for objection, even if the obligor was unaware of such circumstances, and was unable to assert it before the closure of pleadings without fault, even if the obligor was unaware of such circumstances.

(2) In light of the above legal principles, the Plaintiff’s ground for objection to the instant case is merely an circumstance prior to the closing of argument in the instant judgment, and thus, cannot be deemed as the ground for objection.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

4. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.