A garnishee shall be liable to pay the collection amount and damages for delay to a tax claimant who has seized claims due to the delinquency in payment of national taxes.

The third obligor liable to pay to the defaulted taxpayer is liable to pay the amount to be collected and the delay damages to the plaintiff who becomes the tax claimant under the National Tax Collection Act by notification of the attachment of claims.

Article 45 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

Ui Government District Court and Yangyang Branch 2015 Ghana75841 Collection Funds

○ ○

AA

June 24, 2016

August 12, 2016

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 00 million won with 15% interest per annum from December 9, 2015 to the day of complete payment.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

Cheong-gu Office

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Facts of recognition;

(4) According to the purport of each of the above 00B No. 2, BB No. 1, 000, 2000, 2000, 300, 2000, 2000, 2000, 2000, 300, 2000, 200, 200, 200, 200, 200, 200, 300, 200, 200, 200, 200, 200, 300, 200, 200, 200, 200, 200, 300, 200, 200, 200, 200, 300,00, 200,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,0

2. Determination

A. Determination on the cause of the claim

According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay the above purchase price to the plaintiff who became a collection authority in accordance with the National Tax Collection Act upon the notice of seizure of each of the claims for the purchase price under the sales contract of this case by BB. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the above purchase price, barring special circumstances, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 15 percent per annum of the year under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from December 9, 2015 to the date of complete payment, as requested by the plaintiff, as to the second attachment notification attached to the plaintiff (the amount including additional dues increased after the above KRW 00,000,000) and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15 percent per annum under the same Act

B. Judgment on the defendant's defense

In regard to this, the Defendant paid KRW 0 billion to BB prior to the first attachment notification under the instant sales contract, and paid additional KRW 00 billion prior to the second attachment notification, and the remaining sales amount at the time of the second attachment notification is merely KRW 00 million. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant paid KRW 0 billion to BB prior to the first attachment notification, as otherwise alleged by the Defendant, in excess of KRW 1,200,000,000, and KRW 000,000,000 upon the second attachment notification.

Therefore, the defendant's defense is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case against the defendant is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.