The defendant's compulsory execution against the plaintiff is based on the payment order of February 22, 2019.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On November 2018, from November 201 to December 2018, the Defendant filed an application against the Plaintiff for payment order seeking KRW 10,177,500, and damages for delay thereof, and expenses for demand procedure (Seoul District Court Decision 2019 tea3769).

B. On February 22, 2019, the above court issued a payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) stating that “the Plaintiff shall pay KRW 10,177,500 to the Defendant, and KRW 5% per annum from February 12, 2019 to the date on which the original copy of the instant payment order was served, and KRW 61,500 per annum from the following day to the date on which the original copy of the instant payment order was served, and KRW 61,500 per annum from the next day to the date on which the payment was fully paid.”

The original of the above payment order was served on the Plaintiff on February 27, 2019, and the above payment order was finalized at that time.

C. On February 28, 2019, March 31, 2019, April 30, 2019, respectively, 2,020,100 won, and October 24, 2019, 2040,200 won, and 622,243 won on October 7, 2019, and 7,302 won, respectively, were repaid to the Defendant.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry in Gap evidence 1-3 (including each number)

2. Inasmuch as there is no evidence to prove that there was an agreement or designation between the Plaintiff and the Defendant as to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff’s repayment order recognized earlier shall be appropriated in the order of statutory appropriation in the order of appropriation of the expenses, interest, and principal among the claims finalized by the instant payment order.

The Plaintiff’s 2,020,100 won paid on February 28, 2019 shall first be appropriated for the repayment of KRW 61,500 as the expenses for demanding the payment of KRW 61,50,00, and if the remainder of KRW 1,958,600 and the subsequent repayment are appropriated for the repayment of interest and principal as indicated below, the Defendant’s claims finalized upon the instant payment order were fully repaid.

Therefore, since the defendant's claim that was finalized by the payment order of this case has already been extinguished, compulsory execution based on the payment order of this case cannot be allowed.

3. The Defendant’s claim regarding the Defendant’s assertion did not pay food for January 2, 2019 to February 2019, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim is unjust.