1. The Defendant’s payment order against the Plaintiff was based on the Seoul East Eastern District Court Decision 2014Hu23550.

1. In full view of the purport of the argument in Gap evidence No. 1, the defendant applied for a payment order stating that "the defendant transferred the above loans to the citizen bank of the corporation to the defendant on May 20, 2004, and on June 15, 201, the promotion savings bank re-transfer the above loans claims to the plaintiff on June 15, 201," and that "the promotion savings bank paid 33,315,393 won and 11,90,339 won among them to the plaintiff on June 28, 2014, the payment order was paid at the rate of 20% per annum from the day following the day when the original copy of the payment order was served to the day when the payment order was fully repaid." The above court accepted the payment order citing the above application on May 28, 2014, and the above payment order was served to the plaintiff and confirmed at that time.

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. In the case of a final and conclusive payment order, the grounds for failure, invalidation, etc. that occurred prior to the issuance of the payment order can be asserted in the lawsuit of objection against the payment order (see Articles 58(3) and 44(2) of the Civil Execution Act). The claims against the Plaintiff were able to be exercised from May 20, 204, which was the time when the first claim was transferred, at the latest. Since the fact that the Defendant applied for the payment order is apparent in the record that the Defendant’s claim for the payment order was made on May 2014, which was more than five years after the lapse of five years thereafter, it is apparent that the commercial statute of limitations has expired.

B. The Defendant asserts that the extinctive prescription has been suspended pursuant to the instant payment order. However, prior to the application for the instant payment order, the extinctive prescription for the loan claim of this case has already been completed prior to the application for the instant payment order, and the grounds for failure or invalidation, etc. arising prior to the issuance of the payment order may be asserted in the lawsuit of objection against the relevant payment order.