1. The defendant's appellate court's Goyang Branch 2004 tea7184 has executive force against the plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a person who was the nominal owner of the C's business registration, actually operated by B.

B. On July 5, 2004, the Defendant agreed to pay the Defendant the outstanding amount of KRW 18,000,000,000 from among the interior works of a child welfare store ordered from February 2, 2004 to April 2004, for the payment of the agreed amount under the contract to the Defendant by June 30, 2004.

C. On July 30, 2004 in the above case, "the defendant (the plaintiff in this case) paid 18,000,000 won to the plaintiff (the plaintiff in this case) and 20% interest per annum from the day following the day when the original copy of the payment order was served to the day of complete payment." The payment order in this case was served on August 5, 2004 on D and 401 in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, an office of Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and the payment order in this case became final and conclusive on August 20, 204.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1-6 and 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. In the case of a final and conclusive payment order, the grounds for failure or invalidation that occurred prior to the issuance of the payment order can be asserted in the lawsuit of objection against the payment order, and the burden of proof as to the grounds for objection in the lawsuit of objection shall also be in accordance with the principle of burden of proof distribution in the general civil procedure.

Therefore, if the plaintiff asserts that the claim was not constituted by the defendant in a lawsuit claiming objection against the established payment order, the defendant is liable to prove the cause of the claim.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da12852, Jun. 24, 2010). B.

With respect to whether the Plaintiff agreed to pay KRW 18,00,000 to the Defendant by June 30, 2004, the health class, and the evidence No. 5 cannot be used as evidence for lack of evidence to prove the establishment of the petition, and No. 1 and No. 2.