1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

The plaintiff asserted that compulsory execution based on such payment order is unfair, and filed a lawsuit of objection against the claim, since the original copy of the payment order stated in the purport of the claim was not served on the plaintiff.

However, a claim objection lawsuit is a subject of the enforcement title duly established. The above claim itself is that the above payment order cannot be a valid enforcement title because it is not served on the debtor. Thus, if the above claim is based on the above argument, a claim objection lawsuit seeking the exclusion of enforcement force can not be filed, even though it is not disputed with the subsequent completion of the objection against the above payment order.

(2) In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the lower court determined otherwise by misapprehending the legal principles as to the filing of an objection to the instant claim, as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal. In so doing, it did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the filing of an objection, as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal, contrary to what is alleged in the ground of appeal.