1. The Defendant’s payment order for the management expenses case No. 2017 tea 1879 against the Plaintiff was due.

1. On September 29, 2017, the Defendant, for which the payment order became final and conclusive, filed an order against the Plaintiff to pay management expenses claim against the Plaintiff (No. 2017 tea1879), and issued a payment order stating that “the Plaintiff shall pay KRW 2,096,455 to the Defendant and any delay damages incurred therefrom,” and the fact that the payment order became final and conclusive around that time does not conflict between the parties.

2. The gist of the plaintiff's assertion is the cause of the claim in this case, and the defendant claims management expenses to the plaintiff without any grounds. Thus, the plaintiff is not obliged to pay management expenses to the defendant, and the plaintiff is not allowed to enforce compulsory execution based on the above payment order.

3. In the case of a final and conclusive payment order, the grounds for failure, invalidation, etc. arising 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 claim of the payment order, and the burden of proof as to the grounds of objection in the lawsuit of objection shall also be in accordance with the principle of burden of proof distribution in the general civil procedure.

Therefore, if the plaintiff asserts that the claim was not constituted by the defendant in a lawsuit claiming objection against the established payment order, the defendant is liable to prove the cause of the claim.

(2) In light of the above legal principles, the Defendant is liable to prove the cause of the claim for management expenses, as the Plaintiff asserted that the management expenses claim, which was the cause of the claim for payment order, was not established. However, the evidence submitted by the Defendant alone is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant had the management expenses claim against the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

(In spite of the name of this court, the defendant did not state the grounds, etc. for the imposition of management expenses. Therefore, the establishment of the claim for the payment order of this case cannot be recognized. Thus, the defendant's payment order of this case against the plaintiff was due.