1. The Defendant’s compulsory execution against the Plaintiff is denied based on the payment order (No. 2017 tea) No. 4990.

2...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 24, 2017, the Defendant filed an application against the Plaintiff for the payment order with the Incheon District Court 2017 tea490, and on March 16, 2017, the Defendant did not dispute with the Defendant on March 16, 2017, the amount of KRW 20,000,000 and damages for delay pursuant to the instant payment order. In light of the deposit amount deposited by the Plaintiff, the original copy of the instant payment order appears to have been served on March 15, 2017 on the Plaintiff. From March 15, 2017, the Defendant received the payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”). The instant payment order became final and conclusive.

B. On April 7, 2017, the Defendant is the litigation cost recognized in the instant payment order, which was KRW 52,900, out of the amount above 20,052,90 according to the instant payment order, to the Incheon District Court C.

The damages for delay of KRW 20,000,000, out of the Won and the above money, was claimed as the claim amount, and the compulsory decision to commence compulsory auction was rendered on the real estate located in Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City owned by the plaintiff.

C. On April 28, 2017, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 361,636 as damages for delay, while the Plaintiff deposited KRW 20,361,64 with the Defendant as the principal and interest of the debt due to the instant payment order as the principal and interest of the Defendant as the principal and interest of the Defendant as the principal and interest of the Defendant on April 28, 2017, but this appears to have been erroneous in 361,644.

It is the amount claimed that the Defendant paid the sum of the auction deposit and delivery fees of KRW 1,860,000.

Of them, KRW 21,65,444, including KRW 1,240,90, and KRW 52,900 relating to the instant payment order, excluding the amount expected to be refunded by the Defendant, was deposited in repayment, and the Defendant already paid the said deposit.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, since the amount of debt (including payment order expenses) and enforcement expenses on the payment order of this case against the defendant are repaid and extinguished, compulsory execution based on the payment order of this case shall be rejected.

2.3.