1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 199,311,400 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from January 19, 2016 to the date of full payment.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff: (a) based on the authentic copy of the judgment with executory power in the case of loans rendered by the Jeonju District Court 2013Kahap449 against Bobnd Co., Ltd., the Plaintiff: (b) on December 23, 2014, based on the original copy of the judgment with executory power in the loans case; (c) on December 23, 2014, based on the Changwon District Court 2014Mo13230, Changwon District Court 201, the Defendant “Defendant”; (d) the amount of the claim is KRW 199,31,400; and (e) the amount of the claim to be seized and collected to the Defendant’s limited liability company and Bobnbnbd Co., Ltd newly constructed in the Dong-dongdong-si, Kimhae-dong; and (e) the instant collection order: (e) the seizure and collection order stipulated as “the amount of the claim amount

B) The instant collection order was served on the Defendant on January 5, 2015. [The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds of recognition, the entries in the evidence Nos. 2 and 4, and the purport of the entire pleadings]

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of claim, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the above KRW 199,311,400 and the damages for delay thereof, according to the collection order in this case. However, it is difficult to recognize that the Defendant was requested to pay the money for delay as to the portion prior to the date of delivery of the copy of the complaint in this case, since the garnishee of the collection order issued a collection order to the execution creditor, who is liable for delay as to the amount equivalent to the amount of the claim seized to the execution creditor, the execution creditor shall be deemed to have received the claim for the money for collection from the execution creditor after the issuance of the collection order, and it is difficult to accept the part concerning the

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant’s claim against the Defendant, which is a seized claim under the instant collection order, was already paid in full by the Defendant and completed settlement, and thus, the amount to be additionally paid or settled is to be paid.