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

On January 10, 2013, the Plaintiff: (a) obtained a decision on provisional seizure of claims against C regarding KRW 100 million (hereinafter “decision on provisional seizure”); and (b) served the Defendant on January 14, 2013 with the loan claim of KRW 200 million against C as the preserved right; (c) the said decision was served on the Defendant on January 14, 2013.

The plaintiff applied for a payment order against C to recover the above loan, and around that time, the payment order was issued by Seoul Eastern District Court 2013j4274.

On August 28, 2013, the Plaintiff: (a) transferred the provisional seizure KRW 100 million to the original seizure of the claim for the price of goods against the Defendant in Seoul Eastern District Court 2013TTT14677; (b) received the transfer and collection order of the provisional seizure to newly seize KRW 2,761,643; and (c) served the Defendant on September 24, 2013.

C and the Defendant settled the price of the goods at the end of each month. On January 31, 2013, after delivery of the provisional attachment decision of this case to the Defendant, the Defendant’s price of the goods to C remains at KRW 89,977,005.

[Reasons for Recognition] Fact-finding, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and the judgment of the court below as to the ground for a claim as a whole of the pleadings, barring special circumstances, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the collection amount of KRW 89,977,05, which the plaintiff, the collection obligee, according to the seizure and collection order of this case, and delay damages.

The defendant's assertion as to the offset of set-off by the defendant has the defendant's claim for sales incentives of KRW 70,786,440 against KRW 110 million against KRW 30,000,000 against KRW 10,000,00,000 against KRW 30,000,000.

In this regard, the plaintiff is not in conformity with the ordinary trade practice that C made only the defendant with a sales incentive agreement.