beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s original copy of the payment order against the Plaintiff on January 23, 2014, Incheon District Court Decision 2014Hu2643, supra.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On May 14, 2013, the Defendant received a seizure and collection order (hereinafter “instant seizure and collection order”) against the claim to return the lease deposit against the Plaintiff in Dong-gu, Incheon (hereinafter “instant house”) of Dong-gu, Incheon (hereinafter “instant house”) as to the obligor C and the third obligor as KRW 53,287,671, based on the executory exemplification of the judgment in the transfer proceeds case No. 2007Ga35046, the Defendant issued a seizure and collection order against the Plaintiff on July 24, 2013. The above seizure and collection order was served on the Plaintiff on July 24, 2013.
B. After that, the Defendant received a payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) from the Incheon District Court Decision 2014 tea2643 to seeking payment of KRW 53,287,671 from the above court on January 23, 2014, stating that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant delay damages at the rate of 20% per annum from the day following the day when the original copy of the instant payment order was served to the Defendant and 34,900 won for demand procedure from the day when the original copy of the instant payment order was served to the day of complete payment,” and the said payment order was served to the Plaintiff on February 3, 2014, and was finalized on February 18, 2014.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 3, significant facts in this court, purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. In the case of a payment order for which relevant legal principles have become final and conclusive, the grounds for failure, invalidation, etc. arising prior to the issuance of the payment order may be asserted in the lawsuit of demurrer against the payment order (see Articles 58(3) and 44(2) of the Civil Execution Act). The burden of proving the grounds for objection in the lawsuit of objection shall also be in accordance with the principle of allocation of burden of proof in general civil procedure.
Therefore, if the plaintiff asserts that the claim was not constituted by the defendant in the lawsuit of objection against the established payment order, the claim against the defendant.