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

A. From 1996 to 1998, the Gyeonggi Bank got B a company’s general loan. On September 25, 2006, a company specializing in crocastael Asset-backed Securitization filed a lawsuit claiming the amount of transfer (this Court Decision 2006Gahap7218), and the decision of recommending settlement was finalized on March 13, 2007.

B. On March 21, 2017, the Plaintiff, upon receipt of the claim pursuant to the aforementioned final settlement recommendation, filed an application for a seizure and collection order against B’s wage and retirement allowance claims with the obligor, B, and the third obligor as the Defendant. The said order reached the Defendant on March 27, 2017.

(No. 2017TTN 4387; hereinafter “instant claim seizure and collection order”). 【No dispute exists concerning the grounds for recognition, entry of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, significant facts in this court, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff asserts that there is a claim for benefits to the Defendant Company B, as long as B actually operates the Defendant Company, since there is a substantial labor relationship with the Defendant Company.

According to the evidence Nos. 7 and 8, there is room to view that B is actually involved in the management of the defendant company, but such circumstance alone constitutes the actual worker of the defendant company

The plaintiff's above assertion is without merit, since it is not sufficient to recognize the existence of the claim for benefits and retirement allowances against the defendant company Eul, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

B. 1) The Plaintiff acquired the business of “C” operated by B from around 2000 (D used the trade name “E”.

(2) Around 2009, the Defendant Company acquired the business of “E” and thus, the Defendant Company asserts that it is liable for the repayment of B’s obligations as a transferee of business which belongs to its trade name.