The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

According to the facts established by the court below, since non-party 1, who was an employee of the plaintiff, paid the money to the plaintiff, the Board of Audit and Inspection rendered a decision on May 17, 1960 to compensate for 2,216,000 won to the non-party 1. However, since the non-party 1 failed to perform his liability for compensation within the period determined by the Board of Audit and Inspection, the head of the plaintiff's supervisory agency entrusted the defendant with the disposition of default on the non-party 1's real estate, and the defendant sold the non-party 1's real estate at 7,10,000 won by public auction. The plaintiff already completed the provisional attachment execution to preserve the civil claim against the non-party 1's above real estate before the above public auction disposition, and as seen above, the plaintiff had other rights to receive the above compensation as stated in Article 76 of the National Tax Collection Act, and therefore, it is difficult to view the plaintiff as the defendant in the above legal relationship with the above disposition of public auction.

Therefore, this appeal is dismissed as it is without merit, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party.

This decision is consistent with the opinions of the involved judges.

The judge of the Supreme Court is Hong Dong-dong (Presiding Judge) and Dong-dong (Presiding Justice)