1. The defendant's compulsory execution against the plaintiff is denied based on the payment order issued by Busan District Court 2008 tea8787.

2. This.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 7, 2008, the Defendant filed an order against the Plaintiff for payment of the purchase price with Busan District Court Decision 2008Da8787, and issued a payment order to the Defendant jointly and severally with Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) to pay KRW 59,570,430, and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from the day after the original copy of the payment order was served to the day of complete payment. The above payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) was served around that time.

B. In the instant payment order, the Defendant asserted that “the Defendant supplied various main goods to Nonparty Company and the Plaintiff from October 2005 to October 2007, and did not receive KRW 59,570,430. The Plaintiff, as the representative director of Nonparty Company, sold goods supplied to Nonparty Company to Nonparty Company for the purpose of taking illegal acquisition of the profits of Nonparty Company, and took unfair profits therefrom.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1 (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. As the Defendant asserted in the instant payment order as the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff asserted that the goods were supplied by the Defendant or obtained the profits of the non-party company, or the non-party company did not guarantee the obligations of the non-party company, and sought non-permission of compulsory execution based on the instant payment order.

As a representative director of the non-party company, the defendant asserts that the non-party company jointly guaranteed the non-party company's obligation.

B. In the case of a final and conclusive payment order, the reason for failure, invalidation, etc. occurred prior to the issuance of the payment order may be asserted in the lawsuit of objection against the payment order with respect to the claim which became the cause of the request for the payment order, and the objection raised in the lawsuit of objection against such request.