1. The Defendant’s compulsory execution against the Plaintiff based on the payment order No. 2014, 21735, Sungnam Branch of Suwon District Court for the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On August 28, 2014, the Defendant filed a lawsuit claiming return of unjust enrichment against C (Seoul Southern District Court 2014Da204325) and rendered a judgment that “C shall pay 4,900,000 won to the Defendant and delay damages.”

B. On October 16, 2014, the Defendant received a seizure and collection order (this Court 2014TTT 12551) regarding KRW 6,913,69 from among the claims for return of the lease deposit against the Plaintiff of the Plaintiff as the claims for the claim pursuant to the above judgment, and the said order was served on the Plaintiff around that time.

C. Since then, on November 18, 2014, the Defendant applied for a payment order against the Plaintiff to seek the payment of the above collection amount, and received a payment order (this Court Decision 2014 tea 21735, supra) stating that “the Plaintiff shall pay KRW 6,913,69 and delay damages to the Defendant,” and the above payment order was finalized around that time.

On January 8, 2015, the Defendant received a seizure and collection order (this Court 2014TTTT16918) as to KRW 7,031,137 of the Plaintiff’s deposit claims against the Sung-nam Saemaul Depository.

On January 28, 2015, the defendant collected KRW 486,736 based on the above collection order.

E. C is an unmarried child of the Plaintiff and resides together with the Plaintiff at the home owned by the Plaintiff, and there is no lease relationship with the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 6, purport of whole pleadings

2. Since there is no lease relationship between the Plaintiff and C, there is no claim for return of deposit for lease against the Plaintiff.

The defendant obtained a collection order (this Court 2014TTT 12551) with respect to non-existent claims, and based on this, completed some collection from the plaintiff in order of the above payment order and the collection order (this Court 2014TT 16918). The compulsory execution based on the above payment order is not permissible, and the above 486,736 won collected by the defendant is not legally attributable.