1. The Defendant’s payment order issued on November 27, 2018 by the Daegu District Court and racing support for the Plaintiff is based on the payment order issued on November 27, 2018.

1. Basic facts

A. At around May 17, 2018, the Defendant filed an application for payment order with this court against the Plaintiff and C (the Plaintiff’s mother) by asserting that “C borrowed KRW 54 million from the Defendant on May 17, 2017, and the Plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed the obligation for the loan.” This court issued a payment order with the Defendant on November 27, 2018, stating that “The Plaintiff shall jointly and severally pay the Plaintiff KRW 54 million with the Defendant at a rate of 15% per annum from the day following the delivery of the original copy of the payment order to the day of complete payment.”

B. On January 8, 2019, the above payment order was issued to C and the Plaintiff (the address of the Plaintiff and C was the same, and the payment order against the Plaintiff was also served). Since C and the Plaintiff did not raise any objection thereto, the above payment order was finalized on January 23, 2019.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant payment order”). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, significant fact in this court, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. The plaintiff does not have a joint and several surety for the above loan debt against the defendant of the plaintiff C, so compulsory execution based on the payment order of this case shall be dismissed.

B. As the Plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed the above loan debt, the Plaintiff’s claim is without merit.

3. Determination as to the cause of action

A. In the case of a payment order for which relevant legal principles have become final and conclusive, the grounds for failure or invalidation that occurred prior to the issuance of the payment order may be asserted in the lawsuit of demurrer against the payment order. The burden of proof as to the grounds for objection in the lawsuit of objection shall also be in accordance with the principle of burden of proof distribution in 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 defendant is responsible for proving the cause of the claim.