1. As to the payment order for the loan case between C and the Defendant, the Seoul Central District Court 2015 tea326991.

1. According to the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the facts in the annexed sheet can be acknowledged.

2. The defendant asserts that the plaintiff cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim since C corporation paid 5.7 million won to C corporation.

A lawsuit for grant of execution clause is instituted in order to obtain the execution clause by judgment, by asserting and proving that the creditor has an executory power to obtain the execution clause. The psychological objects of the lawsuit for grant of execution clause should be deemed to have satisfied the requirements for grant of execution clause including the fulfillment of conditions or the fact of succession. Therefore, it is not allowed to assert in the lawsuit for granting the execution clause the grounds for objection against the claim under Article 44 of the Civil Execution Act, such as repayment, inasmuch as

(See Supreme Court Decision 2011Da93087 Decided April 13, 2012). Therefore, the Defendant’s above assertion is without merit without further examining.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.