The defendant's payment order against the plaintiff is based on the Seoul Central District Court 2020 teas 103540s.

Plaintiff’s assertion

Since the Defendant’s claim against the Plaintiff on the payment order in the Seoul Central District Court Order No. 2020 teas. 103540 (hereinafter “instant payment order”) is the guarantee claim of the loan claim against D Co., Ltd. for which the extinctive prescription has been completed prior to the application for the payment order (hereinafter “instant guarantee claim”), compulsory execution based on the instant payment order shall be denied.

2. Since the Defendant’s instant guarantee claim against the Plaintiff is a claim based on commercial activities, the five-year extinctive prescription is applied under the Commercial Act. At least the fact that a loan claim against E has come due on March 16, 2012 is not a dispute between the parties, and the said loan claim and the instant guarantee claim have expired on March 16, 2017.

The facts that the Defendant applied for the instant payment order on January 16, 2020 are significant in this court. Since it is apparent that the instant payment order was filed after the expiration of the extinctive prescription of the instant payment order, compulsory execution based on the instant payment order should be rejected.

3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.