1. The Defendant’s order based on the payment order in the Daejeon District Court Branch Decision 2016 tea 2251 against the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff’s assistant intervenor is a company with the purpose of wedding hall business.

The Plaintiff is the representative director of the Plaintiff’s Intervenor from October 2014 to March 2015.

B. On December 21, 2016, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff had a claim for KRW 10,377,900 for the purchase price of goods from December 21, 2012 to January 18, 2014 (hereinafter “the purchase price of goods in this case”) and applied for a payment order as the Daejeon District Court’s 2016 tea251 for the payment order.

C. On December 26, 2016, the Plaintiff was served with the payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) issued on December 22, 2016 by the above court on December 26, 2016, but did not raise an objection within two weeks, and the instant payment order was finalized on January 10, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. In the case of a final and conclusive payment order, the grounds for failure or invalidation that occurred prior to the issuance of the payment order can be asserted in the lawsuit of objection against the payment order, and the burden of proof as to the grounds for objection in the lawsuit of objection shall also be in accordance with the principle of burden of proof distribution in the general civil procedure.

Therefore, if the plaintiff asserts that the claim was not constituted by the defendant in a lawsuit claiming objection against the established payment order, the defendant is liable to prove the cause of the claim.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Da12852 Decided June 24, 2010). B.

The Plaintiff, the obligor of the instant payment order, asserts that the Plaintiff’s Intervenor, not the Plaintiff, concluded a goods supply contract with the Defendant, and thus, the Plaintiff’s Intervenor, not the Plaintiff, is also liable for the payment of the instant goods payment claim.

Therefore, the defendant must prove that the debtor is the plaintiff of the claim for the price of the goods of this case.

The number of Gap evidence 2, 4, and 8 shall be each number.