The defendant's order of payment is based on the order of payment from the Changwon District Court 2012j. 93, Masan District Court for the plaintiff.

1. On February 29, 2012, the Defendant filed a request for payment order against the Plaintiff for the payment of KRW 4,440,312 and its delay damages, which were supplied to the Plaintiff from February 23, 2009 to October 19, 2010.

The order of payment ordering the payment of the said money was served on June 12, 2012 by the court 2012 tea93, and became final and conclusive on June 27, 2012.

[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy

2. The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant acquired the right to operate a D gas station from C only on July 201, 201, and the Plaintiff was supplied with the oil from the previous operator C only, and that there was no oil price not paid until October 19, 2010 as alleged by the Defendant. Thus, the Plaintiff was only supplied with the oil from C, and there is no dispute between the Defendant and the fact that the Plaintiff was not supplied with the oil from C.

Therefore, we cannot accept the argument that the plaintiff should pay the amount equivalent to the oil price to the defendant without examining other issues.

On June 27, 201, the defendant, who received all gas station facilities from C on June 27, 2011, comprehensively acquired the claims against the plaintiff, claiming that the plaintiff is liable to pay it to the defendant.

However, even if examining all the evidence submitted by the Defendant, there is no evidence to acknowledge that C, the transferor of the claim, has notified the Plaintiff of the transfer of the oil price claim.

Therefore, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is difficult to accept.

In addition, the defendant asserts that the payment order in this case was already finalized and thus, it cannot be contested for the reason that there was no claim through a lawsuit of objection. However, in a lawsuit of objection against the final payment order, the defendant can assert not only the reason that the claim was extinguished after the issuance of the payment order, but also the reason that the claim was not established or invalidated before the issuance of the payment order.