1. It is based on the original copy of the payment order for the Defendant’s investment deposit case with the Goyang District Court 2015j3316 Goyang Branch for the Plaintiff.

1. In full view of the purport of the argument in Gap evidence No. 1, the defendant issued a payment order on November 5, 2015, stating that "the plaintiff shall pay 100,254,000 won to the beneficiary assets management company (hereinafter "the beneficiary assets management"), and the plaintiff may be deemed the same corporation as the beneficiary assets management. Thus, the plaintiff is responsible for returning the above investment money, and the defendant filed an application for payment order against the plaintiff as the beneficiary assets management company for the return of the above investment money under the beneficiary assets management. The above court ordered payment order on November 5, 2015, "the plaintiff shall pay 100,254,000 won to the defendant and its delay damages." The above payment order can be acknowledged as finalized at that time.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that, inasmuch as the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff had a completely separate corporate entity, compulsory execution based on the above payment order ordering the return of investment funds for the management of plugs, on the ground that it is the same legal entity, should be denied.

B. 1) The Plaintiff’s Asset-Backed Securitization Act (hereinafter “Asset-Backed Securitization Act”) comprehensively taking account of the entire purport of the argument in the statement Nos. 3 through 8 as to the evidence No. 8

A) A special purpose company established pursuant to the Act, which is a company that carries out the business of managing, operating, and disposing of non-performing loans taken over from the bank of Korea and distributes money collected therefrom to investors in asset-backed securities, and a special purpose company including the Plaintiff, can not establish a business office other than the head office, and can not hire employees (Article 20(2) of the Asset-Backed Securitization Act, and external business operations are conducted through asset managers, business trustees, and fund managers, etc.). The Plaintiff entered into a trust agreement for asset management and asset management, and made it possible for the management of the PS assets to perform the Plaintiff’s business.