A. The Plaintiff is a company established for the purpose of maritime cargo transportation services, etc., and the Defendant is a company established for the purpose of truck transportation services.

B. The Plaintiff transported freight from Jun. 27, 2017 to Nov. 2, 2017 at the Defendant’s request from the optical port to the Western port.

C. On October 18, 2017, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 50,00,000,000, in total, around 30,000,000, around November 30, 2017, with the transport service charges for the said period.

On May 27, 2020, the successor intervenor received a claim seizure and collection order (hereinafter “the collection order of this case”) with the amount claimed as KRW 110,824,571 against the debtor as the defendant of this case, based on the executory order of the Gwangju District Court 2020 Taga57396, the Gwangju District Court 201, Gwangju District Court 201, 201, under which the lawsuit of this case is pending, based on the executory order of the decision of 2018 Mahap5019, and the original copy was served on the defendant on June 8, 2020.

The phrase “the indication of the claim to be seized and collected” of the collection order of this case is indicated as follows:

With respect to the case of claim for the price of goods between the debtor and the garnishee in Gwangju District Court Decision 2018Da52489 and Gwangju District Court Decision 2019Na60157, the following facts: (a) claims such as the judgment (resolution, decision) and principal payable by the debtor against the third debtor due to the termination and agreement of the above litigation; and (b) the amount until the above claim amount out of the amount claimed by the debtor against the third debtor; (c) the evidence No. 15, Eul evidence No. 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings:

2. If there exists a seizure and collection order on the claim ex officio concerning the part of the plaintiff's lawsuit in this case, only the collection creditor may file a lawsuit for performance against the garnishee, and the debtor shall lose its standing to file a lawsuit for performance against the seized claim.

(See Supreme Court Decision 9Da23888 delivered on April 11, 2000, etc.). The above facts are based on the above facts.