1. The judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff entered the Daegu Bank Account under the Plaintiff’s name (B; hereinafter “the Daegu Bank Account”) in the comprehensive passbook loan application form (No. 3-1; hereinafter “the instant loan application form”) and attached a copy of the Plaintiff’s identification card and a copy of the Daegu Bank Account.

B. A new mutual savings bank opened a new loan bank account in the name of the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant loan account”) with an agreement on January 30, 2003, KRW 5 million, the agreed maturity date of the agreement on January 30, 2006, the annual interest rate of KRW 9% per annum, and the interest rate of arrears rate of KRW 18% per annum, and five million per day was withdrawn in cash.

C. On January 30, 2003, which was acquired from the new loan bank as Busan District Court Branch Branch 2007 tea13012, the Pakistan Savings Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Co., Ltd.”) filed an application against the Plaintiff for a payment order claiming payment of KRW 5 million, interest thereon, and delay damages claim against the Plaintiff. The above payment order became final and conclusive on January 15, 2008.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant payment order”) . [Grounds for recognition] . [The entry of Gap 2, 3, and 4 (including serial numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul 6, 7, 9, and 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff visited a corporate bond business office to pay the Plaintiff’s card purchase price, and heard the horses that “it may obtain a loan from a new loan mutual savings bank,” and prepared the instant loan application, and written the Plaintiff’s Daegu bank account.

However, the loan application of this case was not recovered because it does not meet the requirements for the loan, and in fact, there was no loan from the new mutual savings bank in fact five million won.

Since a loan contract asserted by the defendant was not formed or invalidated, compulsory execution based on the payment order of this case should be denied.

B. The Plaintiff entered into a loan agreement with the New Loan Savings Bank.