1. On April 12, 2019, Suwon District Court Decision 2019Da36261 decided May 12, 2019 against the Defendant’s Plaintiff.

1. According to the evidence No. 1, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff for the payment of the equipment user fee of KRW 9,00,000 and the delay damages therefor, claiming that “from September 3, 2018 to September 20, 2018, the Plaintiff leased heavy equipment to the Plaintiff at the Plaintiff’s request and made reinforcement works and land creation works, etc. at the site of civil engineering works located in Suwon City C,” and that the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff for the payment of the equipment user fee of KRW 9,000,000 and the delay damages therefor by the Sinsan District Court Decision 2019No6261, May 2, 2019. The above court rendered a decision on performance recommendation (hereinafter “decision on performance recommendation of this case”) on April 12, 2019 to the effect that “the Plaintiff would pay the Defendant KRW 9,90,000 and its delay damages.” The instant decision on performance recommendation of this case was served on the Plaintiff on April 17, 20199.

2. The plaintiff asserts to the effect that no contract exists between the plaintiff and the defendant that the plaintiff did not request the defendant to rent heavy equipment or construct land, and that there is no obligation between the plaintiff and the defendant to pay the defendant the equipment fee of KRW 9.9 million and damages for delay, so compulsory execution based on the decision on performance recommendation of this case shall not be allowed.

On the other hand, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff's work at the request of D, the site director, and part of the work cost, were paid by the plaintiff, so the plaintiff is obligated to pay the equipment user fee and damages for delay.

3. In the case of a final and conclusive payment order, the grounds for failure or invalidation, etc. arising prior to the issuance of the payment order may be asserted in a lawsuit of objection against the payment order with respect to the claim which became the cause of claim for the payment order, and the burden of proof as to the grounds of claim objection in such lawsuit of objection shall be in accordance with the principle of burden of proof distribution in the general civil procedure.

Therefore, the plaintiff did not establish the defendant's claim in the lawsuit of objection against the established payment order.