1. The Defendant’s payment order against the Plaintiff was issued on March 3, 2010, 2010 tea 477.

1. Basic facts

A. A. Around December 4, 1999, the Defendant agreed to provide the Plaintiff with learning log KRW 52,00 per month for subscription fees and KRW 30 per month for the payment deadline of subscription fees (hereinafter “instant agreement”). The Defendant agreed to supply the learning log for 24 months.

B. The Defendant received 572,00 won from the Plaintiff for subscription fees of 1,248,00 won out of the total learning paper reading fees of the above contract period.

C. The Defendant filed an application for a payment order seeking reimbursement of KRW 676,00 for the remainder of learning site subscription fees and damages for delay, which were not paid by this Court No. 2010 tea477, and the said payment order became final and conclusive because the Plaintiff did not submit a written objection within the statutory period.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 3 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff provided all learning sites to the Plaintiff from December 7, 199 to December 18, 2001 in accordance with the instant agreement.

B. The plaintiff's assertion (1) The plaintiff did not receive any learning from the defendant since November 2000.

(2) Even if there was a claim for tuition fees for the remainder of the period to the Defendant, the three-year extinctive prescription has expired.

3. There is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant supplied the Plaintiff with the learning site according to the instant agreement after November 2000.

Even if the Defendant supplied all learning sites, the period of extinctive prescription falls under the price of the goods sold by the merchant (see Article 163 subparag. 6 of the Civil Act), and thus, the Defendant’s claim for the reading fees of this case is three years (see Article 163 subparag. 6 of the Civil Act). The Defendant’s claim for the reading fees of this case, which was not paid, was terminated due to the completion of prescription by exceeding three years from the due date (30

(The expiration date of the extinctive prescription of the right to subscription fees claim on December 2001, which is the last month during the subscription period, is December 31, 2004). The plaintiff's assertion pointing this out is with merit.

4. The plaintiff's claim is justified.