A. On June 28, 2012, based on the executory exemplification of the judgment of the Seoul Western District Court 2010Da4007 claim amount against B as the Defendant’s director, the Plaintiff: (a) on June 28, 2012, based on the executory exemplification of the judgment of the Seoul Western District Court 2010Da4007 claim amount; (b) the garnishee was the Defendant; (c) the third obligor was the Defendant; (d) the amount claimed; and (e) the seizure and collection claim against B’s Defendant; and (e) the amount that does not fall under the scope of prohibition of seizure under Article 246(1)4 of the Civil Execution Act among B’s wage and the retirement benefit claim against B, the amount that does not fall under the scope of prohibition of seizure under Article 246(1)4 of the Civil Execution Act (if the monthly wage is more than 1.5 million won and less than three million won, the amount of the claim is deducted).

B) The instant collection order was served on July 2, 2012 on the Defendant. 【The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds of recognition, entry of evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserts that the Plaintiff is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 30 million, which is part of the collection amount under the instant collection order, as well as damages for delay, since the Plaintiff’s benefits amounted to at least KRW 2.6 million per month. 2) The Defendant asserts that, as the Defendant received benefits amounting to less than KRW 1.5 million per month of the minimum cost of living from the Defendant, B constitutes a claim for prohibition of seizure under the Civil Execution Act and the Enforcement Decree thereof, the Plaintiff’s claim cannot be complied with.

B. 1) First, according to the health team with respect to the amount of B’s benefits, the fact-finding results on October 8, 2014, and the fact-finding results on the head of the National Health Insurance Corporation Busan District Office on October 20, 2014, as well as the purport of this court’s order to submit tax information to the head of the same tax office at the same time, as well as the entire purport of the pleadings, B’s benefits can be acknowledged as constituting grounds for 2.6 million won in the year 2012, 17.5 million won in the year 2013, 1.8 million won in the year 2014, and 1.8 million won in the year 2014 (the Plaintiff’s benefits amounted to 2.6 million won in the month).