1. On January 19, 2015, the Defendant’s Jeju District Court Seopo District Court Decision 2015Gapo14 case against the Plaintiff.

With respect to the Defendant’s claim for construction price against the Plaintiff, which is a claim for the instant performance recommendation decision, the Plaintiff asserts that the extinctive prescription has expired not only because the Plaintiff fully repaid the construction price on April 15, 2003, but also that the extinctive prescription

On January 15, 2015, where three years have passed since the date when the Defendant completed the construction work, it is apparent that the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff for the payment of the construction cost and the decision of performance recommendation in this case was made against the Plaintiff on January 15, 2015, and thus, it is apparent in the record that the said claim for the payment of the construction cost had already expired prior to the filing of the lawsuit by the Defendant, since it is obvious that the said claim for the payment of the construction cost in this case had already been extinguished prior to the filing of the lawsuit by the Defendant.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim seeking the denial of compulsory execution based on the decision of execution recommendation of this case is reasonable.