1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part demanding KRW 20,515,140 shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3...

1. Determination as to the legitimacy of the claim portion of KRW 20,515,140 among the instant lawsuit

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is seeking payment of KRW 25,652,874, excluding KRW 57,147,126, out of KRW 82,80,00 of the deposit claims against the Defendant of the non-party company on behalf of the non-party company, with the claim for return of unjust enrichment against C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “non-party company”) as the preserved claim.

B. 1) Determination 1) Where a seizure and collection order has been issued on a claim, only the collection obligee may file a lawsuit against the garnishee, and the obligor loses the standing to file a performance lawsuit against the claim subject to seizure (see Supreme Court Decision 9Da23888, Apr. 11, 200). This likewise applies to the procedure for disposition on default as prescribed by the National Tax Collection Act, and when the obligor of the claim subject to seizure is notified of seizure, the head of a tax office, who is the delinquent taxpayer, shall obtain the right to collect the claim by subrogation of the obligee, who is the delinquent taxpayer, and the obligee, the delinquent taxpayer, cannot exercise the seized claim (see Supreme Court Decision 2014Da67188, Mar. 12, 2015; 2014Da67195, etc.). Meanwhile, “the obligor does not exercise his/her rights on his/her own,” which is the requirement for exercising the subrogation right of the obligor, and thus, the obligee cannot exercise his/her rights on his/her own behalf. 2915.