1. The request for retrial of this case is dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion of the Plaintiff (Plaintiff) and its determination on this issue are demanding the Daegu District Court to issue the original copy of the payment order in the instant case No. 2013 tea7670 against the Defendant (Defendant for review) through the reexamination of the instant case.

However, the Plaintiff’s filing of a petition does not constitute a ground for retrial or quasi-deliberation (see Articles 470(1) and 472(2) of the Civil Procedure Act) (where an obligor raises an objection within two weeks from the date of receiving the order, the payment order shall lose its effect to litigation procedures, and pursuant to Article 474 of the same Act, the payment order may be recognized as having the same effect as the final and conclusive judgment on the payment order only when there is no objection against the payment order. However, the Plaintiff (Reopening Plaintiff) filed an application against the Defendant (Reopening Plaintiff) for the payment order issued on October 21, 2013 by the Daegu District Court 2013Hu7670, which was issued on the same day by the said court (Reopening Defendant). Since the payment order was issued on November 1, 2014 before the two weeks elapsed from the date of receiving the order, the original and conclusive copy of the above order may not be dismissed as the Defendant’s filing of a petition for review order with the competent District Court 20130.25.13