1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, the following facts can be acknowledged.

On September 10, 2009, the Financial Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "Financial Co., Ltd. of the Eastyang (hereinafter referred to as the "Dongyang") filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff for the claim for the transfer money with the court 2009 Ghana 1728163, and was sentenced on September 10, 209 to the judgment in favor of the plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the "the judgment in favor of the plaintiff") that "the plaintiff shall pay the social Co., Ltd. of the Dongyangyangyangyang with the amount of 5,630,919 won and the amount of 2,52,964 won per annum from June 2, 2009 to the date of full payment." The above judgment was finalized on October 10, 209.

B. The Defendant received a claim based on the instant decision on the transfer money from the Eastyang social group, and notified the Plaintiff of the transfer of the claim around June 2017.

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. A. A summary of the assertion 1) The Plaintiff was not eligible for a bank loan loan in 2004, and was unable to obtain the loan from the Japanese bank. The Defendant’s application for the loan and the agreement asserted by the Defendant are not documents of a normal loan. Therefore, the Defendant’s claim for the loan loan based on the instant loan loan decision is null and void. (ii) The Plaintiff’s obligation for the loan to the Japanese bank due to the occurrence of the Plaintiff’s loan to the Japanese bank around February 2004, which was five years thereafter, has expired on March 2007.

B. 1) In a case where an executive title subject to an objection in a claim objection suit is a final and conclusive judgment, the reason should arise after the closure of pleadings in the relevant lawsuit, and even if an obligor was unaware of such circumstance and was unable to assert it before the closure of pleadings without fault, the circumstance that occurred earlier may not be the ground for objection (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da12728, May 27, 2005). 2) The Plaintiff’s assertion, such as the Plaintiff’s assertion, that was, the Plaintiff did not reside in his domicile at the time of the instant case, and the Plaintiff’s mother did not open with the complaint, etc.