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

B There is a claim for the construction cost corresponding to “the total amount of sales revenue for apartment units 253 units constructed by B and apartment units 15,041,100,000 won in cash and 253 units of apartment units constructed by B, and for sales facilities of the first floor and the 4,5th floor neighborhood living facilities.”

Inasmuch as the Plaintiff is insolvent at present B, the Plaintiff seeks payment of KRW 247,00,000 among the above claim against the Defendant against the Defendant in subrogation of B for the purpose of preserving the above claim for the construction payment against the Defendant.

2. We examine the legitimacy of the lawsuit based on the defendant's main defense of safety.

In case where the creditor's right to the debtor to be preserved by subrogation is a monetary claim against the creditor when the debtor is subrogated, the necessity of preservation is recognized only when the debtor is insolvent.

In this case, it is not sufficient to acknowledge the fact that B, the debtor, was insolvent, the statement No. 9, and the fact-finding results of this court's high time inquiry (No. 9 is limited to the data that B, the representative director of the Eul, was seized and seized on the real estate owned by C, and the property tax on the real estate of the corporation is imposed by the local government having jurisdiction over the location of the real estate (see Article 108 of the Local Tax Act) and the fact-finding results of the above fact-finding on the ancient city are only acknowledged, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise.

Therefore, the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case is unlawful because it does not meet the necessity of preservation among the requirements of creditor subrogation lawsuit.

3. Therefore, we decide to dismiss the instant lawsuit. It is so decided as per Disposition.