1. The Defendant’s compulsory execution against the Plaintiff on June 9, 2010, based on the payment order issued by the Seoul Western District Court 2010 tea3748.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 16, 2003, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant who is engaged in the book publishing business, and with the Plaintiff’s child C, who was the third grade of elementary school at the time, to enter into a monthly subscription rate of 40,000 won (the contract term of this case 24 months; hereinafter “instant contract”).

The defendant sent the learning place to the plaintiff's domicile according to the above contract and claimed monthly subscription fees as of the 15th of each month as the last day of the month.

The last monthly subscription payment date under the instant contract is June 30, 2005.

B. On June 1, 2010, the defendant applied for a payment order against the plaintiff for the payment of the price of goods under the contract of this case and filed the same year.

6. 9. The payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) was issued to the Defendant that “the Plaintiff shall pay 840,000 won and its delay damages to the Defendant.”

6. 29. The above payment order was finalized.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings

2. “Claims determined within a period of less than one year” prescribed by Article 163 subparag. 1 of the Civil Act, which require the short-term extinctive prescription for three years, means claims paid regularly for a period of less than one year;

(See Supreme Court Decisions 96Da25302 delivered on September 20, 196, 2005Da65821 delivered on February 22, 2007, etc.). According to the above facts, the right to claim monthly subscription fees based on the contract of this case is "a claim for payment of money within a certain period of one year" and the period of extinctive prescription is three years. The application for the payment order of this case was filed three years from June 30, 2005, which is the last payment date of the subscription fees under the contract of this case.

Therefore, inasmuch as the extinctive prescription of the Defendant’s subscription claim has expired, compulsory execution based on the payment order of this case cannot be permitted.

3. It is so decided as per Disposition by admitting the plaintiff's claim.