1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 121,065,436 and its payment from February 17, 2015.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 30, 2009, the Plaintiff loaned 61 million won interest to B on September 30, 2009 (payment on the last day of each month) and on January 31, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a notarial deed of a monetary loan agreement (No. 2057) entered into by a notary public on the same day as above.

(hereinafter “instant loan claim”). (b)

Based on the instant loan claim, the Plaintiff filed an application for seizure and collection order with B, based on the amount of the claim as KRW 121,065,436 [the sum of KRW 61,00,000 of the principal and interest or delay damages thereon, interest or delay damages calculated at 59,830,136 (the interest or delay damages calculated at 20% per annum from October 1, 2009 to August 26, 2014), and expenses for execution are 235,300], based on the instant loan claim, the Plaintiff filed an application for seizure and collection order with B, based on the claim to seize and collect the construction cost claim for the construction of a factory building on the third and second lots of land (hereinafter “construction cost claim”). The Ulsan District Court rendered a decision on August 28, 2014 to seize and collect the above claim.

(2014. The original copy of the seizure and collection order was served on September 26, 2014 to the Defendant, the garnishee, who was the garnishee.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1, Gap evidence 2-1, 2, 3, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion B lending the name of Seosan General Construction Co., Ltd. to the Defendant and concluded a construction contract (hereinafter “instant construction contract”) for the building of the building of the building on the land outside C and two lots of land (hereinafter “instant building”) at Seosan-si (hereinafter “instant construction contract”). As such, the parties to the instant construction contract are B, and as B completed the instant construction, B has the claim for construction price against the Defendant.

Therefore, according to the seizure and collection order of this case.