1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The grounds for this part of the basic facts are as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance (Article 420 of the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance). Thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is merely a business transfer contract that takes over D’s electrical construction business performance between D and D, and there is no conclusion of a merger contract or a merger procedure. The Plaintiff’s actual company owner, who is delegated by D to carry out subsequent procedures for the transfer of business by the Plaintiff, completed the merger registration of this case by forging the merger contract and the minutes of the general meeting of shareholders.

Therefore, even though there is no legal act between the Plaintiff and D, it cannot be deemed that there was a substantive succession to the parties indicated in the judgment of this case, each succession execution clause of this case, which was based on the premise that the Plaintiff succeeded D, was illegal.

B. Determination 1) Article 31(1) of the Civil Execution Act concerning an succeeded execution clause provides that “an execution clause may be granted for the sake of a debtor’s successor indicated in the judgment or for the execution against a debtor’s successor indicated in the judgment.” Here, an succeeding execution clause for an execution against a debtor’s successor is granted for the execution against a debtor’s general successor or a person who succeeds to an obligation based on the judgment specified in the judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da11630, Jan. 29, 2015). In a case where the debtor’s succession indicated in the judgment is obvious to the court or proves by a certificate, a succeeding execution clause may be granted according to the order of the presiding judge for the execution against a successor (Articles 31 and 32 of the Civil Execution Act). Whether the requirements for granting succeeded execution clause were substantive legal successors with respect to the party indicated in the title of execution (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Da52190, Jun. 23, 2016).