1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. The total cost of a lawsuit shall be borne individually by each party.

1. On June 22, 2015, the Defendant, as the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim, concluded a lease agreement on construction machinery for 24 tons of dump truck, sump truck, sump truck, and sump truck owned by the Defendant between G and G, which possessed an order of management director of the Plaintiff, who is not the representative director of the Plaintiff.

G has no authority to act on behalf of the plaintiff as the husband of H by the representative director of D (hereinafter referred to as D).

However, the above lease contract is concluded between D and the defendant, not the plaintiff, since it was merely the authority to conclude the aggregate contract with G for convenience.

Therefore, the plaintiff is not a party to the contract, and there is no claim for equipment rental fee against the defendant.

Therefore, the compulsory execution based on the original copy of the payment order in Cheongju District Court 2015j819, which was created on the ground that the above bonds exist, should be denied.

2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is lawful

A. A lawsuit of demurrer to a claim of relevant legal doctrine refers to a lawsuit seeking the exclusion of executory power by asserting the substantive grounds with respect to a claim indicated in the executive title, such as a final and conclusive judgment, which becomes final and conclusive by the debtor (Article 44 of the Civil Execution Act).

An order for payment shall have the same effect as a final and conclusive judgment when no objection is raised, an objection is withdrawn, or a decision of dismissal becomes final and conclusive (Article 474 of the Civil Procedure Act), and since an order for payment in a final and conclusive state cannot become an effective executive title, a lawsuit of objection against a claim seeking the exclusion of executive force

(see Supreme Court Decision 2012Da70012, Nov. 15, 2012). Meanwhile, service on a legal entity should be made by its representative, while service on a legal entity should be made at the domicile, residence, business place, or office of the legal entity.

The business office or office of the representative is also the domicile of the corporation, and thus, it may be served at the seat of the principal office of the corporation, and if such service is impossible, the corporate register, etc. shall be investigated.