1. The Defendant’s compulsory execution against the Plaintiff based on the payment order (Seoul Western District Court 2014Hu11689).

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Hyundai Swiss Savings Bank, Inc., around 2001, extended a flus loan to the Plaintiff, and on December 21, 201, transferred a loan claim to the Defendant under an asset transfer contract.

On March 28, 2012, Hyundai Swiss Savings Bank sent a notice of assignment of claims by content-certified mail, but did not deliver it to the Plaintiff due to the change of the Plaintiff’s address.

B. On February 14, 2014, the Defendant filed a request for payment order against the Plaintiff for the payment of KRW 14,523,531 and delay damages for the principal amount of KRW 3,66,857.

The order to pay the said money was served on March 24, 2014 on the Plaintiff, which became final and conclusive on April 8, 2014.

After that, the Plaintiff filed an objection against the above payment order on April 11, 2014, but the objection was dismissed.

C. On June 5, 2014, based on the finalized payment order, the Defendant executed a compulsory execution against the Plaintiff’s corporeal movables, and on July 23, 2014, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 800,000 to the Defendant.

On August 5, 2014, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit.

[Grounds for Recognition] The absence of dispute or significant facts in this court, Gap 1, Eul 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserted that since the transfer of the above loan claims was not notified to the plaintiff, the plaintiff cannot set up against the plaintiff, and since the above loan claims had already expired by prescription before the defendant's acquisition of the defendant's claim, compulsory execution based on the above payment order cannot be allowed.

The defendant asserts that the notification of the assignment of claims cannot be valid even if the plaintiff did not actually receive the notification, and that the plaintiff renounced the benefit of prescription by accepting the obligation, such as repayment of KRW 800,000 to the defendant on July 23, 2014.

B. An obligor who is entitled to the judgment benefit may waive the prescription benefit after the completion of the statute of limitations, which is legal due to the completion of the statute of limitations.