1. Of the instant lawsuit, the Busan District Court Decision 201Da5239 decided March 18, 201 (principal lawsuit) and 6768 (Counterclaim) of the Civil Procedure Act is the Civil Procedure Act.

1. According to the records, the following facts are recognized.

A. On January 14, 2010, the Defendant filed a claim against the Plaintiff for a payment order against the Plaintiff with the Busan District Court 2010:5,369,095 won for reimbursement and damages for delay after November 28, 2007, against the Plaintiff’s claim for payment of damages for delay after November 28, 2007. The above court issued the payment order with the same content (hereinafter “instant payment order”). On January 15, 2010, the Plaintiff was served with the original copy of the instant payment order on April 17, 2010, and filed an objection on April 30, 2010, the above case was implemented as litigation proceedings under the former court 201Ka5239 (former: 2010GaGa175166).

On December 20, 2010, the Plaintiff filed a counterclaim against the Defendant on December 20, 201, the Plaintiff paid KRW 30,000,000 to the same court (on December 20, 2010, No. 2010, No. 415536) as KRW 30,000 at the same court (on June 20, 201, No. 2010, No. 415536) and sought implementation

(hereinafter referred to as "case subject to review" in the above principal lawsuit and counterclaim. 1. Determination on the principal lawsuit

A. The plaintiff asserts that the lawsuit of this case is unlawful because the business office of the financial institution to which the loan of this case was granted is located in Busan Shipping Daegu, and his domicile is also in Busan Young-gu, and the lawsuit of this case is against its jurisdiction.

On the other hand, the Civil Code adopts the so-called principle of the obligation to carry out the obligation other than the specific delivery obligation at the creditor's present address or place of business (Article 467). Thus, the court at the seat of the defendant's business office also has the jurisdiction over the lawsuit of this case. Since the defendant's Busan Ulsan District Corporation has jurisdiction over the lawsuit of this case, the plaintiff's defense of this case is without merit in this court having jurisdiction over this area.

B. In full view of each of the evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including paper numbers) as to the merits, the Defendant’s request for the guarantee by the Plaintiff.