1. The Defendant’s decision on performance recommendation is based on the Daejeon District Court’s Daejeon District Court’s 2016 Ghana 13475 against the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 24, 2011, the Defendant remitted KRW 9,000,000 to the deposit account (Account Number D) in C’s name.

(hereinafter referred to as “amount of remittance of this case”). (b)

On June 30, 2016, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking the return of the instant remittance. On July 7, 2016, the said court rendered a decision of performance recommendation that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant the amount of KRW 9,000,000 with interest calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint to the day of full payment.”

The decision on performance recommendation was made after that time because the plaintiff did not raise an objection.

(Based on recognition), Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, and Eul evidence No. 1, and the court's order to submit financial transaction information as of November 18, 2016 to the president of the Daejeon District Court, the results of the order to submit financial transaction information as of November 18, 2016, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant did not borrow the remittance amount of this case from the defendant and did not know C.

On the other hand, the defendant asserts that he lent the remittance amount to C at the plaintiff's request.

B. Article 5-8(3) of the Trial of Small Claims Act provides that “No restriction shall be imposed on the assertion of an objection to the claim pursuant to Article 44(2) of the Civil Execution Act with respect to compulsory execution based on the decision of performance recommendation [in a lawsuit of demurrer against a claim established by a judgment, the grounds for the objection should have arisen after the conclusion of pleadings (in the case of a judgment without holding any pleadings, after the judgment was rendered).”

Therefore, a lawsuit of demurrer against a final decision on performance recommendation is not only a ground for extinguishing the claim after the decision on performance recommendation or preventing the exercise of the claim, but also a ground for objection, such as failure or invalidation of the claim before the decision on performance recommendation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da5499, Jan. 26, 2006).