1. It is based on the original order of payment order dated April 26, 201, issued by the Gwangju District Court for the Plaintiff by the Defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 18, 2010, D drafted to the Defendant each of the loan certificates stating “39 million won for rent, maturity of 18% per annum, interest rate of August 20, 2010,” and “39 million won for rent, maturity of 39 million won per annum, and interest rate of 18% per annum” (hereinafter “each of the loan certificates of this case”).

B. Meanwhile, D entered the Plaintiff’s name, resident registration number, and address in the joint and several surety column of each of the instant loan certificates and affixed the Plaintiff’s seal imprint certificate.

C. After that, when the Defendant demanded D to obtain the Plaintiff’s certificate of personal seal impression, D issued the Plaintiff’s certificate of personal seal impression as of March 12, 2010 to the Defendant.

On April 26, 2011, the Defendant filed a payment order with D and the Plaintiff under this Court No. 201 tea731 and filed a payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) with D and the Plaintiff on April 26, 201, stating that “D and the Plaintiff jointly and severally pay the Defendant the amount of KRW 39 million and the damages for delay from January 6, 2011.” The said payment order was finalized on May 13, 201.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that D's debt owed to D is not a joint and several surety, and that D's joint and several surety column of each of the instant loan certificates in this case was arbitrarily prepared without the plaintiff's consent.

As to this, the defendant stated that D had obtained the consent of the plaintiff at the time of the preparation of each of the loans in this case, and that the plaintiff is liable for joint and several liability because he received the certificate of personal seal impression issued by the plaintiff.

B. Since a payment order for judgment does not bring res judicata even if it has become final and conclusive, it may be deliberated and judged in a lawsuit of demurrer against the claim regarding all the claims stated in the payment order. In this case, the burden of proving the existence or establishment of the claim is against the obligee (defendant).

On the other hand.