1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion argues that, in the case of loans extended by Daejeon District Court 2018Na4640, the Plaintiff’s judgment ordering the Defendant to pay KRW 2.9 million and delay damages therefor was rendered on December 19, 2018, but the Defendant received a false loan certificate without the Plaintiff’s consent, and C transferred KRW 3.76 million in total to the Defendant’s bank account between March 16, 2016 and June 20, 2017, compulsory execution against the Plaintiff based on the said Daejeon District Court 2018Na4640 decision shall not be permitted.

B. Determination: (a) In a case where an executive title subject to an objection in a claim objection suit is a final and conclusive judgment, the reasons must have arisen after the closure of pleadings in the relevant lawsuit; and (b) the circumstances arising earlier shall not be deemed as the grounds for objection (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da12728, May 27, 2005). Therefore, there is no dispute between the parties as to the facts that the above circumstances alleged by the Plaintiff as the grounds for objection in the claim objection claim were prior to November 28, 2018, which is the date of closing of pleadings in the relevant loans case, for which the Plaintiff seeks to refuse compulsory execution, as the above circumstances alleged by the grounds for objection are subject to a ground for objection (see, e.g.

I would like to say.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion that compulsory execution against the plaintiff should not be denied based on the above Daejeon District Court Decision 2018Na4640 is not accepted.

2. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.