1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

3.Paragraph 1 of the text of the judgment of the court of first instance.

1. Basic facts

A. (1) On October 28, 2004, the Plaintiff’s judgment bond against the Plaintiff was respectively established as a company that conducts fire-fighting business, civil engineering business, construction business, planting and selling landscape trees, etc., which was established on May 18, 2005 as a company dialogue electricity, Co., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., on November 13, 2006, as the current rock industry, on June 9, 2008, as the company chip Co., Ltd., Ltd., and on August 2, 2010.

(2) On June 18, 2007, A was awarded a contract for landscaping planting construction work from the Plaintiff on the part of the Ilcheon-si Construction Project located in Boan-dong, Seoan-si, Seoul, and completed construction on October 20, 2007, but was not paid KRW 342,472,610 out of the agreed construction cost.

Accordingly, A filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff, which guaranteed the payment of KRW 270,000,000 among the accrued construction costs, to claim the payment of construction costs, etc. under the Daejeon District Court Branch of Daejeon District Court Decision 2009Gahap2807, and the above court rendered a judgment accepting A’s claim on October 20, 209, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on November 7, 2009.

(2) On March 12, 2008, Daejeon District Court Decision 2008Kadan1396 decided on March 12, 2008 and completed provisional attachment registration under Article 1353 of the Daejeon District Court's receipt of the provisional attachment order as to the Plaintiff's specialized construction mutual aid association on May 1, 2009, by making the Plaintiff's claim for the payment of the unpaid construction cost as the preserved claim against the Defendant. In addition, A, on March 1, 2009, issued the provisional attachment order as the Daejeon District Court's 2009Kadan2621 decided on May 1, 2009 as to the Plaintiff's specialized construction mutual aid association.

B. (1) During the process of collecting the claim for the construction price against the Plaintiff and the actual operator of the Plaintiff, the J, who had worked as the managing partner of the Plaintiff, considered the method of accepting the Plaintiff in lieu of the construction price, and during that process, A was on July 8, 2010.