1. The Defendant (Appointed Party) against the Plaintiff A and the appointed parties C, Gwangju District Court Decision 2013Da62747 Decided August 12, 2015.

1. The following facts of recognition may be acknowledged by integrating the purpose of the entire pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 3.

The Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the Selected C for the claim for construction cost under the Gwangju District Court 2013Kadan62747, and on August 12, 2015, the said court rendered a judgment that the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the Appointed C jointly and severally paid to the Defendant the amount of KRW 23,197,931 and the amount calculated at the rate of 6% per annum from October 12, 2013 to August 12, 2015, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment. The said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

B. The Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the Appointed C repaid to the Defendant the Defendant, and the amount of KRW 20,000,000 on September 18, 2015, and KRW 6,313,905 on November 6, 11 of the same year.

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, barring any special circumstance, the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the Appointed C have fully repaid the principal and interest of the obligation based on the above judgment to the Defendant.

I would like to say.

B. In regard to this, the Defendant asserts that the amount repaid by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) A and the appointed Party C should be first appropriated for the expenses, such as the litigation cost of the above judgment, KRW 5,923,050, the provisional seizure cost of real estate, KRW 350,000, the application cost for compulsory auction of real estate, and KRW 1,900,000, and thus, the principal and interest of the obligation based on the above judgment cannot

On the other hand, the defendant's above obligation to reimburse the above costs of lawsuit or execution cost becomes due only when the decision to determine the amount of litigation costs or execution cost becomes final and conclusive. There is no evidence to acknowledge that the above decision to determine the amount of litigation costs or execution cost becomes final and conclusive prior to the repayment of the principal and interest pursuant to the above decision to which the plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the appointed party C become due. Thus, the defendant's argument that the above amount of litigation costs or execution cost should be appropriated first cannot be accepted

C. Accordingly, compulsory execution by the above judgment shall be enforced.