1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Basic Facts

On March 22, 2017, the Defendant applied for a loan payment order against the Plaintiff as Seoul Western District Court 2017Guj816, and the said court issued a payment order on March 30, 2017, stating that “the Plaintiff shall pay 5% per annum from February 15, 2008 to February 14, 2013; 11% per annum from February 15, 2013 to the delivery date of the original copy of the payment order; and 15% per annum from the next day to the date of complete payment (hereinafter “instant payment order”); and the instant payment order was served to the Defendant as the delivery place of the Plaintiff and received as the Plaintiff’s live-in partner (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s live-in partner”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2, 3, and 8 (including provisional number), and plaintiff's claim purport of the whole pleadings. The plaintiff sent the payment order of this case to the plaintiff's false address and received D other than the plaintiff. The plaintiff asserted that there was no money borrowed from the defendant, and that the plaintiff excluded the execution of the payment order of this case.

A lawsuit of demurrer against a claim for judgment on the legitimacy of a lawsuit in this case refers to a lawsuit seeking the exclusion of executory power by asserting the substantive grounds as to a claim indicated in the executive title, such as a final and conclusive judgment, which is final and conclusive by the debtor (Article 44 of the Civil Execution Act).

An order for payment shall have the same effect as a final and conclusive judgment when no objection is raised, an objection is withdrawn, or a decision of dismissal becomes final and conclusive (Article 474 of the Civil Procedure Act), and since an order for payment in a final and conclusive state cannot become an effective executive title, a lawsuit of objection against a claim seeking the exclusion of executive force

(See Supreme Court Decision 2012Da70012 Decided November 15, 2012). Meanwhile, service is, in principle, an address of the person to be served under Article 183(1) of the Civil Procedure Act.