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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

A. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant’s father C with Busan District Court Decision 2015Da139066, and rendered a favorable judgment on June 27, 2016 that “the Defendant (C) shall pay to the Plaintiff 5,948,630 won and 25% interest per annum from June 8, 2015 to the date of full payment,” and the above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

B. Based on the final judgment on September 13, 2018, the Plaintiff received a seizure and collection order (hereinafter “instant collection order”) on the claims indicated as “the indication of claims to be seized and collected” as the obligor C, the garnishee, the Defendant, and the claim amount of KRW 10,820,02, from the Busan District Court Decision 2018TT as the final judgment on September 17, 2018, and the said collection order was served on the Defendant on September 17, 2018.

The obligor with indication of claims to be seized and collected is a person with bad credit standing, and receives allowances, allowances, etc. in the name of the third obligor in relation to his/her service in Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D and 23, and is returned from the third obligor. It is returned from the third obligor. The amount up to the claim amount among the claims for return, such as the above pay, allowances, etc. that the obligor has against the third obligor, [based grounds for recognition], the entry in the items in subparagraphs A and 3,

2. The plaintiff asserted and determined the claim of this case regarding the claim subject to seizure of the collection order of this case, and C asserts that, while serving as the example of "F", it is a multi-level company E (hereinafter "the company of this case"), it registers its members in the name of the defendant, who is one of its children, and operates a multi-level business. Accordingly, C is fully paid to the defendant with the benefits, operating allowances, etc. to be paid by the company of this case. Accordingly, C claims against the defendant for the return of money, such as the above benefits, operating allowances, etc. received by the defendant from the company

As alleged above by the plaintiff, whether there is a seized claim or not, the health unit Gap, 4 to 4.