CONTENTS
- 1. The Client Who Sought a Payment Order Attorney
- - Changing the Cause of Action and Shifting the Issues
- 2. Payment Order, Explained by a Payment Order Attorney
- - Procedure for Applying for a Payment Order
- 3. The Payment Order Attorney's Strategic Response
- - Interpreting the Transaction Structure in Which a Legal Cause Exists
- - Focused Demonstration That the Requirements for Unjust Enrichment Were Not Met
- - The Absence of Actual Gain and Interpretation of the Special Agreement
- 4. Result of the Payment Order Attorney's Assistance, Dismissal of the Plaintiff's Claim
- - A Payment Order That Requires a Response
1. The Client Who Sought a Payment Order Attorney
The client who came to the payment order attorney was suddenly served with a payment order for several tens of millions of won in vessel repair costs.
However, the client had never requested that the vessel be repaired, nor had he ever promised to bear the repair costs.
Nevertheless, a unilateral payment order was issued as if a contract existed, and accordingly the client quickly sought the assistance of a payment order attorney and proceeded with an objection.
Changing the Cause of Action and Shifting the Issues
As a result of the client's objection, the case proceeded to a suit on the merits, and the plaintiff changed the cause of action to a civil claim for the return of unjust enrichment (Article 741 of the Civil Act).
Article 741 of the Civil Act (Contents of Unjust Enrichment)
The plaintiff, even if the client did not contract directly, argued that the client obtained an actual benefit from the ship repair and therefore must return the corresponding cost.
Accordingly, the key issues in this case became whether the requirements for a claim for the return of unjust enrichment were met, and in particular whether legal cause was absent.
2. Payment Order, Explained by a Payment Order Attorney
A payment order attorney will explain payment orders.
A payment order is a judgment in which the court orders a debtor to make payment in response to a creditor's claim seeking payment of money, securities, or similar.
If the debtor does not file an objection, the order has the same effect as a final and conclusive judgment, and compulsory execution then also becomes possible.
However, as in this case, where no actual contract exists or an unjust claim is made against a person despite the transaction being that of a third party, the person must demonstrate the impropriety of the payment order through an objection.
The debtor may file an objection within 14 days from the date of receiving service, after which the matter proceeds as a civil lawsuit.
Procedure for Applying for a Payment Order
The procedure for filing a payment order is as follows.
② Trial (written review without the parties' attendance)
③ Decision on the payment order
④ Service (court > debtor)
⑤ Receipt or non-receipt of service by the debtor
- If not received, civil litigation
⑥ No objection (compulsory execution) / objection within 14 days (civil litigation)
3. The Payment Order Attorney's Strategic Response
The payment order attorney organized the client's position into the following key arguments and actively defended the case.
Interpreting the Transaction Structure in Which a Legal Cause Exists
In order to rebut the plaintiff's claim of unjust enrichment, the payment order attorney first clearly structured the cause of the repair and the attribution of that benefit.
∙ This sales contract was thereafter rescinded, and a sales contract was attempted again through another person, but this too fell through
∙ The plaintiff itself acknowledged that the party who commissioned the repair was not the client but the third party
As a result, the person who possessed the vessel and directed the repair at the time of the repair was the third party, and the client merely recovered the vessel later due to subsequent circumstances.
Accordingly, the attorney strongly argued that the client could not be regarded as owing an obligation to return unjust enrichment to the plaintiff merely because the client had taken delivery of the vessel.
Focused Demonstration That the Requirements for Unjust Enrichment Were Not Met
For a claim for return of unjust enrichment to be established, all of the following requirements must be met under Article 741 of the Civil Act.
∙ Existence of a loss
∙ A causal relationship between the two
∙ Absence of a legal cause
Among these, the payment order attorney presented as the core argument that the requirement of the ‘absence of a legal cause’ was not met.
The plaintiff received the contractual performance from a third party (the person who requested the repair), and even if the result of that performance was attributed to the client, the attorney emphasized that this is not a legal structure under which a claim can be made against a third party rather than the counterparty to the contract.
The Absence of Actual Gain and Interpretation of the Special Agreement
The plaintiff argued that the value of the vessel had increased due to the repairs, and that the resulting benefit accrued to the client.
However, the payment order attorney rebutted this on the following grounds.
∙ The utility of the vessel repairs is also unclear, and actual use was not proven
∙ Additional costs and losses arising from the condition of the vessel also exist
Accordingly, the attorney emphasized that it is difficult to conclude that the economic benefit from the repairs clearly accrued to the client, and that no 'benefit' substantively exists.
4. Result of the Payment Order Attorney's Assistance, Dismissal of the Plaintiff's Claim
With the assistance of the payment order attorney, the client filed an objection to the payment order and, at the same time, intensively contested the failure to meet the requirements for the claim for return of unjust enrichment.
As a result, the court determined that the plaintiff's claim was difficult to accept legally and dismissed the plaintiff's claim in its entirety.
A Payment Order That Requires a Response
A payment order is a simple procedure, but if no response is made, it can have the same effect as a judgment based solely on the creditor’s one-sided assertion.
In particular, as in this case, where the facts are unclear or the legal relationships of a third party are involved, hastily paying the amount or making no response at all is very risky.
Law Firm Daeryun has many specialist attorneys with extensive case experience in civil proceedings.
If you have received an unexpected payment order, please 🔗schedule a legal consultation to promptly and accurately identify the legal issues and establish a response strategy.
Related News
This content is based on actual case studies of Daeryun Law LLC with some adaptations, and the copyright belongs to our firm.
Unauthorized reproduction, duplication, or distribution and other copyright infringements may result in legal action under applicable laws.
