A. On January 24, 2011, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff for claiming the return of unjust enrichment against the District Court Decision 2010 Ghana3204, and the above court rendered a judgment against the Defendant on May 14, 2009, stating that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant the amount of KRW 3,00,000 and the interest calculated at a rate of 5% per annum from May 14, 2009 to September 2, 2010, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment” (hereinafter “related judgment”), and the said judgment became final and conclusive as is.

B. On May 9, 2016, the Defendant requested the Government District Court 2016TT 2016TT 6579 and collected KRW 1,354,912 from the Third Obligor Partnership on June 13, 2016, upon receipt of the quoted decision on May 9, 2016 (hereinafter “i collection order”).

Then, the Defendant requested the same court 2017TTT 3308 collection order and received the acceptance order (hereinafter “B collection order”) and collected KRW 5,816,895 from the Republic of Korea, which is the garnishee, on April 11, 2017.

① When applying for a collection order, the Defendant spent KRW 15,570 in total, KRW 4,00 in revenue stamps, KRW 11,570 in delivery fees, and KRW 4,00 in revenue stamps, and KRW 14,90 in delivery fees, respectively, when applying for a collection order.

【Unsatisfy-based dispute concerning recognition, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including additional number), Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and significant facts in this court (the stamp paid by the defendant for each collection order, the delivery fee)

2. The allegations and judgment of the parties

A. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant collected the money according to each collection order of this case in excess of 12,821 won if the defendant met the principal and interest of the plaintiff's debt according to the judgment related to the collection order of this case.

On the other hand, the defendant asserts that the amount of KRW 4,00 and the amount of KRW 33,480 according to the application for each collection order remains when he preferentially pays the amount of the principal and interest of the relevant judgment.

B. The costs necessary for the enforcement under Article 53(1) of the Civil Execution Act shall be borne by the debtor.