1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On July 21, 2008, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant who is engaged in the interior construction business, etc. for the remodeling construction work of KRW 1.2 billion for a church.

(hereinafter “the instant construction contract”). Accordingly, the Defendant’s execution of construction work, and the above church building was approved for use on August 26, 2009, and the Plaintiff paid the construction price to the Defendant by April 13, 2012.

B. On February 11, 2016, the Defendant filed a loan claim lawsuit against the Plaintiff by Busan District Court Decision 2016Da304511, and rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff on November 17, 2016, that “the Plaintiff shall pay KRW 40 million to the Defendant and its delay damages.”

In the appellate trial of this case (Dasan District Court 2016Na55223), the Plaintiff asserted that the claim for return of unjust enrichment of KRW 30 million was set off against the Defendant’s claim for return of unjust enrichment of KRW 30 million among the construction cost of the above construction contract, and that the judgment became final and conclusive around that time, on September 28, 2017, because the Plaintiff’s appeal was dismissed on September 28, 2017 on the ground that there was no sufficient evidence to acknowledge it.

(hereinafter referred to as “prior judgment”). C.

On the other hand, the Defendant applied for a payment order of KRW 159 million against the Plaintiff and the payment order became final and conclusive (this Court Decision 2015 tea1629). On August 20, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit of demurrer against the Defendant for the refusal of compulsory execution based on the above payment order under the court Order as the court Order No. 15483, Feb. 15, 2017, three years (Civil Code No. 163 subparag. 3) for the short term extinctive prescription period.