1. The Seoul Central District Court 2015Gaso640641 rendered a decision on the Defendant’s recommendation of performance with respect to the Defendant’s loan claim.

1. The decision on performance recommendation as to the cause of a claim does not take place even after the final and conclusive decision has become final and conclusive, and thus, the lawsuit to raise an objection does not apply to the restriction based on the time limit of res judicata. Therefore, in the hearing of the lawsuit to raise an objection, the determination of all the grounds of the claim stated in the decision on performance recommendation may be made. In this case, the burden of proof as to the existence or establishment of the claim is against the defendant in the lawsuit to raise

In this case, the defendant argued that he lent KRW 20 million to the plaintiff who is the plaintiff by Nonparty C upon the request of Nonparty C, and according to the written evidence Nos. 1 and 2 of this case, it is recognized that money was recorded between the bank account in the name of the defendant and the bank account in the name of the plaintiff under the name of the plaintiff, and the fact that the defendant had referred to the plaintiff while demanding repayment to C is recognized.

However, on the other hand, the plaintiff argues that there is no awareness with the defendant, and that the plaintiff only allowed C to use the plaintiff's bank account. The fact of the above recognition alone is insufficient to recognize that the other party who lent money to the defendant as the plaintiff, not C, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the defendant's loan claims against the plaintiff are not recognized, and compulsory execution based on the decision of performance recommendation as stated in Paragraph 1 of the Disposition should not be permitted.

2. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices, on the ground that the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable.