1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant contracted the construction of the building in this case (hereinafter referred to as the “instant building”) to the two comprehensive construction companies (hereinafter referred to as the “dual comprehensive construction”), and the said construction completed the said construction.

B. On January 13, 2014, the Plaintiff applied for an order for payment of the construction cost against the construction of the two sub-constructions. On January 23, 2014, the payment order was issued on January 23, 2014 by Sungwon District Court Sungnam Branch Branch 2014j123, and the said payment order was finalized on February 18, 2014.

C. On March 6, 2014, the Plaintiff was issued a collection order under the Incheon District Court Order 2014TTT7155 (hereinafter “instant seizure and collection order”) with respect to KRW 71,09,305, out of the claim for the construction cost of the instant building against the Defendant of Breree Construction (hereinafter “the claim for the construction cost of the instant case”), and the Defendant was issued a collection order on March 10, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there has been no dispute, each entry of Gap evidence 1 (including a paper number), a significant fact in this court, and the purport of whole pleadings

2. According to the facts found in the judgment on the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 71,099,305, out of the instant claim for construction cost, and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from June 14, 2014 to the day of full payment after the delivery of a copy of the instant claim to the Plaintiff, which is entitled to collect KRW 71,09,305, out of the instant claim for construction cost.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. 1) Defendant’s assertion concerning the claim for the construction cost of this case as to the claim of this case asserted by the Defendant, in addition to the seizure and collection order of this case, 17 claims such as the seizure and collection order, and the seizure and collection order, and the provisional seizure order of this case, are served to the Defendant and are concurrent. Thus, the Defendant asserts that it is impossible to comply with the Plaintiff’s claim. 2)