1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Progress of the instant lawsuit

A. The Plaintiff jointly supplied the “A” ordered by the Public Procurement Service with the Nonparty Company B (hereinafter “B”) and subcontracted part of the construction work (hereinafter “instant construction work”) to Nonparty C (hereinafter “C”).

B. On April 21, 2016, upon receipt of a payment order against the Plaintiff and B under this court’s 2016 tea2468, C, upon receipt of the payment order against the Plaintiff and B on April 21, 2016, the instant payment order was issued on the following: “The debtors jointly and severally liable to the creditors 408,60,000 won and the amount equivalent to 15% per annum from the date when the original copy of the instant payment order was served to the date when the original copy of the instant payment order was fully repaid, and the instant payment order was finalized on May 10, 2016 because B filed an objection within the statutory period, and the Plaintiff did not raise any objection.

C. The Defendant transferred the claim against the Plaintiff, which became final and conclusive by the instant payment order, to the Plaintiff on May 27, 2016, and urged the Plaintiff to repay the obligation upon obtaining the succession execution clause.

On June 17, 2016, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit claiming the exclusion of the executory power of the instant payment order. Accordingly, the instant lawsuit was filed on September 22, 2016 by the court setting the date for pleading as the date for pleading of September 22, 2016, but the Plaintiff was absent without submitting any briefs or evidence.

On the other hand, the defendant submitted a reply, a preparatory document and a documentary evidence, and appeared at the date of pleading, and this court concluded the pleadings.

2. The plaintiff alleged that the damage liability in lieu of the defect repair claim against C arising from the damage liability in lieu of C’s defect repair is the scheduled set-off against the claim for the construction cost that the defendant transferred from C. Therefore, the plaintiff’s claim is without merit, since there is no evidence to acknowledge it.

3. With respect to an application for resumption of pleadings.