2013 short-term 15 Objection

A

B

March 21, 2014

April 18, 2014

1. The Defendant’s compulsory execution against the Plaintiff is denied based on an executory payment order issued under the 2013j. 69, South Korea District Court Branching the Republic of Korea Branching the Plaintiff.

2. This Court approves the ruling of the suspension of compulsory execution on February 17, 2014 with respect to the case of applying for the suspension of compulsory execution 2014 Chicago1.

3. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

4. Paragraph 2 can be provisionally executed.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. The parties' assertion

A. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

The plaintiff did not directly borrow 10,000,000 won from the defendant upon the request of C to inform C of the plaintiff's account number.

B. Summary of the defendant's assertion

Upon receiving a request from C to lend KRW 10,000,000 from C, the Defendant refused to lend money to C due to lack of self-sufficiency. However, C requested the Plaintiff to lend money to the Plaintiff who actually maintains a matrimonial relationship with C through C. After confirming the Plaintiff’s intention, C remitted KRW 10,000 to the Plaintiff’s account and lending the said money to the Plaintiff. Therefore, the Plaintiff is obliged to pay the principal and interest of the said loan to the Defendant.

2. Determination

In a lawsuit of demurrer against a final and conclusive payment order, the Plaintiff is liable to prove the cause of the claim to the Defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da12852, Jun. 24, 2010).

In this case, in light of the fact that the public health unit and C testified that "in this case, it is necessary to acknowledge that the Defendant lent KRW 10,000,000 to the Plaintiff only with each of the statements and witness E and F as stated in subparagraphs 1 through 10 and each testimony of E and F alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendant lent KRW 10,000 to the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise.

Therefore, compulsory execution based on the payment order of this case should not be allowed.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kim Jin-man