1. Compulsory execution against the plaintiff by the defendant under the payment order order issued by the Suwon District Court 2014Da2558, Suwon-si court 2014.

1. Basic facts

A. On the ground that there were KRW 200,623,664 of the unpaid amount claim out of the amount of goods supplied to the Plaintiff on November 2013, the Defendant filed an application with the Plaintiff for the payment order seeking the said unpaid amount with the Suwon District Court Decision 2014 tea2558.

On May 26, 2014, the above court issued a payment order stating that "the debtor shall pay 6% per annum from January 1, 2014 to the date on which the original copy of the instant payment order was served on the creditor, and 91,300 won per annum from the next day to the date on which the original copy of the instant payment order was served on the creditor, and damages for delay at the rate of 20% per annum from the next day to the date on which the payment is complete, and 91,300 won per annum for demand procedure."

(b) ‘The instant payment order’

Based on the original copy of the instant payment order, the Defendant collected KRW 84,362,733, respectively, and appropriated KRW 84,362,733, in total, by collecting KRW 84,362,733, Oct. 8, 2014, upon receipt of the claim attachment and collection order issued by the Suwon District Court 2014TTTA and the collection order issued by the Suwon District Court 2014TTA, and by collecting KRW 50,000,000,000,000 from the same court.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry in Gap 2 through 4 (including the serial number)

2. The parties' assertion

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Defendant transferred KRW 229,035,266 to the Plaintiff to E.S. Co., Ltd. on December 11, 2013, and the Defendant did not have any claim against the Plaintiff.

Therefore, compulsory execution based on the instant payment order shall not be permitted, and 84,362,733 won collected by the Defendant based on this order shall be returned to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment without any cause.

B. The Defendant’s summary of the Defendant’s assertion, including the assignment of claims asserted by the Plaintiff, transferred a considerable amount of claims against the Plaintiff to Nonparty Company four times, and notified the Plaintiff thereof.

Nevertheless, the Plaintiff is entirely non-party to the transferred bonds.