Of the instant lawsuit, the part of the claim objection shall be dismissed.

The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

The costs of lawsuit.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant sought payment of the mobile homepage hosting costs against the Plaintiff, and applied for payment order as Busan District Court Branch 2018 tea 29582.

B. On July 13, 2018, the Plaintiff was served with the original of the above payment order and did not raise any objection thereto, and the above payment order was finalized on July 28, 2018.

C. On August 7, 2018, the Defendant, based on the original copy of the above payment order, received the claim attachment and collection order from the Seoul Central District Court 2018 other 112476, and appropriated the amount finalized by the payment order from the credit card company, a third debtor, to repay the debt after collection.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the part of the lawsuit in the instant case is legitimate

A. The Defendant asserts to the effect that, on the basis of the original copy of the above payment order, the part of the claim objection in the instant lawsuit is unlawful as there is no benefit.

(b) If a creditor has already satisfied as a whole a compulsory execution based on an executive title is terminated, there is no interest in a lawsuit seeking denial of such compulsory execution by a lawsuit of demurrer against a claim.

(See Supreme Court Decision 96Da52489 delivered on April 25, 1997). In light of the above legal principles, as seen earlier, the Defendant applied for compulsory execution based on the original copy of the above payment order as seen earlier, and accordingly, the Defendant had already been satisfied. Accordingly, there is no benefit of lawsuit seeking non-performance of compulsory execution by filing an objection to the claim.

C. Therefore, the part concerning the claim for objection among the instant lawsuit is unlawful.

3. Determination on the claim for damages

A. D, the Defendant’s employee of the Plaintiff’s assertion, concluded a contract for user fees for mobile website production and hosting services with the Plaintiff, and if the Plaintiff introduces five enterprises to the Defendant, it would provide services free of charge without monthly user fees.