1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The plaintiff's action against the defendant H and G and the defendant C 51,500.

1. The reasons why this court should explain the facts of recognition are as follows: using the 5th five of the judgment of the court of first instance as the "Support for the Daejeon District Court"; and excluding the addition of the following judgments, the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and therefore, the above part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

[Supplementary part] Defendant C 20,000 won C 20,000 won for Defendant H 20,000 won for Defendant H 20,000 won for Defendant H 20,000 won for each of the above 20,000 won for Defendant H 20,000,000 won for each of the above 20,00,000 won for Defendant H 20,000,000 won for each of the above 20,00,000 won for Defendant H 20,00,000 won for each of the above 20,000,000 won for each of the Defendant’s case number of 20,50,000 won for each of the above 13, 2014,3511, 506,246,000,000 won for Defendant H 230,00,000 won for each of the above 205,305,05,294,25,20005,

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, E.C. 5

2. Whether the plaintiff's lawsuit is legitimate

(a) If there exists a seizure and collection order against the claim, only the collection obligee may file a lawsuit for performance against the garnishee, and the debtor shall lose the standing to file a lawsuit for performance against the seized claim;

In addition, an execution creditor may participate in a performance lawsuit filed by the debtor against the third debtor pursuant to Articles 81 and 79 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(Supreme Court Decision 99Da23888 Decided April 11, 200, and Supreme Court en banc Decision 2013Da202120 Decided December 18, 2013) B.

In the case of this case, the intervenor continues to perform the plaintiff's obligation against the defendants.