1. The Defendant’s payment order for the purchase price for goods in the Daegu District Court Branch Decision 2019j555 against the Plaintiff was issued.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant filed an application against C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) and the Plaintiff, the representative director of the Nonparty Company, for the payment order stating that “The Plaintiff jointly and severally and severally filed against the Defendant 49,240,000 won (the unpaid amount out of the price of the goods, such as machinery and parts supplied to the Nonparty Company from October 2018 to November 201, 2018) and the delay damages therefor,” (the Daegu District Court Branch Branch Decision 2019 tea555).

B. The above payment order became final and conclusive because the non-party company and the plaintiff did not raise an objection against the delivery of the original copy of the above payment order.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant payment order”). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The allegations by the parties and the judgment thereof

A. The plaintiff's assertion is that the plaintiff and the non-party company are separate, and the non-party company is supplied with goods from the defendant. Thus, the payment order of this case is the non-party company's debt, and the plaintiff is not responsible for the debt of the payment order of this case. Thus, the execution against the plaintiff of this case should not be allowed.

The defendant's assertion is that the non-party company is the plaintiff's individual company, and the plaintiff was supplied goods from the defendant by abusing the legal personality of the non-party company, so the plaintiff also is responsible for the debt of the payment order in this case. Therefore, the defendant's compulsory execution against the plaintiff is justified.

B. In the case of a payment order for which legal principles have become final and conclusive, the grounds for failure or invalidation, etc. arising prior to the issuance of the payment order may be asserted in the lawsuit of objection against the payment order. 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 general civil procedure.