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

A. On April 10, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against C with the Seoul District Court for seeking payment of money due to loan, etc., and on April 10, 2013, the said court rendered a judgment that “C shall pay to D and each Plaintiff 7,317,850 won, and the amount calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from February 13, 2013 to the date of full payment,” and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

B. On May 8, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for a seizure and collection order of the wage and retirement allowance claim that C has against the Defendant as the case of the original Chuncheon District Court 2013TTT 161. On May 8, 2013, the said court issued a seizure and collection order of KRW 77,317,850 against C’s wage and retirement allowance claim that C has against the Defendant (for KRW 55,00,000, the amount was transferred from the provisional seizure to the original seizure, and the remainder was attached without any provisional seizure). The above seizure and collection order was served on the Defendant on May 10, 2013.

(hereinafter the above seizure and collection order is "the seizure and collection order of this case"). 【The ground for recognition】 The statement in the evidence Nos. 1 through 3

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff asserts that, based on the final and conclusive judgment against C, C received a seizure and collection order as to the benefit and retirement allowance claims that C has against the Defendant based on the final and conclusive judgment against C, and sought partial payment of C’s benefit and retirement allowance claims against the Defendant.

In this regard, the defendant asserts that C is not a worker of the defendant, and there is no room for the claim for benefits and retirement benefits.

B. In full view of the facts stated in Gap evidence Nos. 4 through 11, Eul's testimony, and the whole purport of the pleadings as a result of the order to submit tax information on the Young Tax Office of this court, Eul made the name of the defendant's representative director and had it as the defendant's representative director, and ② The plaintiff and C have seized the claims of this case.