The payment order of the Incheon District Court case 2019j. 8117 between Co., Ltd and the defendant is about the payment order.

1. On December 17, 2019, the judgment on the cause of the claim C (hereinafter “C Bank”) issued a payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) to the Defendant. The payment order became final and conclusive on January 8, 2020, C Bank transferred its claim to the Defendant on the instant payment order on December 17, 2019, and “the Defendant shall pay to C Bank the amount of KRW 15,970,850, and eight million among them, at the rate of 21% per annum from December 12, 2019 to the date of full payment.” The Defendant did not raise an objection, and thus, the above payment order became final and conclusive on January 8, 2020, C Bank transferred its claim to the Defendant on the instant payment order, and the Plaintiff may not be deemed to have reached the purport of the notice of assignment of claim between the Defendant and the Defendant on January 17, 202, and the purport of the notice of assignment of claim to the Defendant on the assignment of claim.

According to the above facts, since the plaintiff constitutes a successor who received a claim based on the payment order of this case from the C bank after the issuance of the payment order, a junior administrative officer, etc. of the Incheon District Court regarding the payment order of this case between C bank and the defendant should grant the execution clause of succession to the plaintiff for compulsory execution against the defendant.

2. As to the defendant's assertion and judgment, the defendant asserts to the purport that the plaintiff's claim of this case is unjustifiable, since the period of extinctive prescription has expired.

In a lawsuit for grant of execution clause under Article 33 of the Civil Execution Act, if the creditor is unable to prove the matters to be attested by a certificate for the grant of execution clause, such reason is based on without being subject to the limitation on the method of proof.