1. The Defendant’s decision on performance recommendation is based on the Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2017 Ghana63295 dated September 6, 2017.

1. The Defendant: (a) lent KRW 9 million to Nonparty C, the operator of the restaurant he/she works for, from June 25, 2015 to July 13, 2015, by transferring the remaining loans to C’s account on six occasions; (b) the Plaintiff, who was in the partnership relationship with C, terminated the partnership agreement with C on October 30, 2015, and notified that C had taken over C’s obligations to the Plaintiff while having decided to operate the restaurant independently; and (c) accordingly, on December 20, 2015, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff received KRW 1 million out of the above loans from the Plaintiff and filed a lawsuit seeking payment of KRW 8 million and delay damages from the Plaintiff under this Court’s 2017Da63295, the Defendant’s decision to grant the remainder loans to the Plaintiff on September 6, 2017 and the Defendant’s decision to accept the claim for performance recommendation from the competent court or the Defendant’s decision to grant the remainder of the loans to the Plaintiff.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion or agreed to accept C’s obligation against the Defendant, or there was no notification to the Defendant.

C only remitted to the Plaintiff one million won in lieu of C upon C’s request.

Therefore, compulsory execution based on the decision of execution recommendation of this case, which is based on the premise that the plaintiff assumed the debt of C, should be denied.

(b) As regards the final decision on performance recommendation, the grounds arising prior to such decision may also be asserted in a lawsuit of demurrer against the claim.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2006Da34190 Decided May 14, 2009). Meanwhile, in a lawsuit of demurrer, the burden of proof as to the grounds for objection should be in accordance with the principle of allocation of the burden of proof in general civil procedure. Therefore, in a case where the Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant’s claim has not been established, the Defendant is liable to prove the cause of the claim.