1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part of the lawsuit is modified as follows.

The plaintiff's main office is 40,482,620 won and this.

The scope of the trial by this court was dismissed by the intervenor in the first instance, but the intervenor did not appeal and only the defendant filed an appeal. Thus, the part which rejected the request for intervention by the independent party was determined separately from the plaintiff's principal claim against the defendant, notwithstanding the defendant's appeal.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 91Da4669, 91Da4676, May 26, 1992). Accordingly, the subject of adjudication by this court is limited to the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant.

Basic Facts

The defendant around March 2014, the construction work of the multi-family house with the fourth floor above the D ground (hereinafter referred to as the "instant building") on the plaintiff during the construction period (hereinafter referred to as the "instant construction work") from March 17, 2014 to the plaintiff during the construction period.

9. The contract was made orally by setting the end of 30.

(hereinafter “instant contract”). The Defendant paid the Plaintiff the construction cost of KRW 466,77 million.

On November 3, 2014, the Defendant obtained approval for the use of the building of this case from the Sungsung market.

[Ground of recognition] The defendant asserts that the part of the plaintiff's principal lawsuit against which the intervenor received a seizure and collection order is unlawful, as to the non-contentious facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the main defense.

If a seizure and collection order is issued for a claim, only the collection creditor may file a lawsuit for performance against the garnishee, and the debtor shall lose the standing to file a lawsuit for performance against the seized claim.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da60417, Sept. 25, 2008; Supreme Court Decision 2009Da85717, Feb. 25, 2010). Meanwhile, a seizure order on a claim takes effect when it was served on a garnishee (Article 227(3) of the Civil Execution Act). Since the effect of the seizure on a claim is limited to the subordinate right, it naturally extends to the interest or damages for delay incurred after the seizure takes effect, but it is also limited to the interest or damages for delay incurred after the seizure takes effect.