1. The creditor's subrogation right may be exercised by the creditor only when the debtor does not exercise his/her right against the garnishee himself/herself. If the debtor has already exercised his/her right at the time when the creditor exercises his/her right of subrogation, the creditor may not exercise his/her right of subrogation of the debtor;

(2) In light of the above legal principles, the lower court’s determination that the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit without a resolution at a general meeting of employees is unlawful by exercising the special right to receive the lawsuit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Da64573, Jul. 26, 2007). In so doing, it cannot be deemed that there was a decision-making by the non-corporate company regarding the filing of the lawsuit.

Therefore, in a case where a lawsuit filed against a third-party debtor in the name of a non-corporate foundation against a non-corporate foundation was dismissed and such judgment becomes final and conclusive on the ground that a lawsuit concerning collective ownership was filed without a resolution of a general meeting of members, the debtor cannot be deemed to exercise his/her

2. On September 22, 2017, the lower court determined that the Plaintiff’s subrogation lawsuit of the Plaintiff, who is the obligor, as the obligor, is unlawful, on the ground that the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming confirmation of the right to claim payment of deposit money against the Defendant on the ground of the claim for confirmation of the right to claim payment of deposit money, which is the cause of the Plaintiff’s subrogation claim, and was sentenced to dismissal on September 22, 2017.

3. However, the above determination by the court below is difficult to accept for the following reasons.

The judgment below

The reasons and records reveal the following facts.

1) The land of this case shall be 477m2 (hereinafter “instant land”) in Gyeongsan-si.

on November 7, 2000, from D forest land 1,408 square meters.