1. Compulsory execution against the plaintiff by the defendant against Busan District Court on March 6, 2015 based on the payment order from 2015 to 5278.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 13, 200, at a notary public’s office B, a certified copy of a monetary loan agreement with the purport that “the loan wave of a stock company was 3,00,000,000 won due and due July 20, 200 shall be lent to the Plaintiff on May 31, 200 by setting forth on July 20, 200. In the event that the Plaintiff fails to perform his monetary obligation under this contract, a certified copy of a monetary loan agreement with the purport that “it is recognizable that there is no objection even if it is immediately enforced.”

B. The trade name of the loan borrowed company was changed to the Japanese Asset Management Co., Ltd. on August 6, 2009; the Japanese Asset Management Loan Co., Ltd. on April 27, 2010; and the Japanese Asset Management Loan Co., Ltd. on December 21, 201.

C. On April 21, 2010, the Japanese Asset Management Co., Ltd. filed an application with the Busan District Court for the issuance of a seizure and collection order against the debtor, the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation, and the Busan District Bank as the third debtor on the instant Notarial Deed as the debtor, the Busan District Court Branch Branch of the Busan District Court, and received a decision of acceptance on April 23, 2010 from the above court.

On January 10, 2012, the Defendant applied for a payment order against the Plaintiff on March 5, 2015, on the ground that the Plaintiff acquired the instant claim based on the Notarial Deed from the Japanese Planning Co., Ltd., and the Defendant applied for a payment order under the Busan District Court Decision 2015Hu5278, Mar. 5, 2015. On March 6, 2015, the said court issued an order on March 6, 2015 that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from the day following the delivery of the payment order to the day of full payment,” and the said payment order became final and conclusive on March 27, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff of the parties' assertion has expired due to the completion of the five-year commercial statute of limitations, so compulsory execution based on the payment order of this case shall not be permitted.