Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

A. On April 5, 2019, the Plaintiff brought a lawsuit against Nonparty C with Nonparty C as the Defendant, and received a favorable judgment from the above court that “Defendant C shall pay the Plaintiff KRW 150,000,000 and delay damages therefrom,” and the said judgment became final and conclusive on October 1, 2019.

B. According to the above final judgment, the Plaintiff requested the Seoul Eastern District Court 2020TT No. 52563 to order the seizure and collection of the debt amounting to KRW 748,00,000 against the Defendant of Nonparty C, and received the order of seizure and collection from the above court on February 24, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1-2, purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The summary of the plaintiff's assertion 1) The non-party C has a duty to pay the loan amount of KRW 1,008,000 from May 9, 2013 to February 23, 2018, and the defendant has a duty to pay the loan amount of KRW 270,00,000, which is a part of the debt amount of KRW 748,000,000, at present, the defendant currently has a duty to pay the loan amount of KRW 738,00,000 on the calculation of KRW 748,00,000, and the plaintiff has a duty to pay the loan amount of KRW 4 (the suspect interrogation of the defendant B as of October 11, 2018) to the defendant's statement of the defendant as above. Accordingly, the defendant has no obligation to pay the loan amount of KRW 167,791,416,00 to the plaintiff as the collecting creditor of this case's seizure and collection order.

B. On the other hand, in a lawsuit for collection, the existence of the obligation to collect the collected amount is a requisite fact and the burden of proof exists on the Plaintiff (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da47175, Jan. 11, 2007). The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is presented by C to the Defendant, as alleged by the Plaintiff, as argued by the Plaintiff.