The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and the purport of the appeal are in the judgment of the court of first instance.

1. Basic facts

A. On January 24, 2019, the Plaintiff drafted a fair deed of KRW 70,000,000 with respect to a loan claim of KRW 70,000,000 against C and a joint and several surety claim of KRW 70,000 with respect to a joint and several surety claim of KRW 70,000,000, which is held against D Co., Ltd. (former trade name: Co., Ltd. E; hereinafter “D”).

B. On March 5, 2019, the Plaintiff received a seizure and collection order (hereinafter “the instant claim and collection order”) against KRW 30,000,000 from the Daegu District Court 2019, and issued to the Defendant on March 11, 2019, regarding the lease deposit return claim of KRW 30,000,00 from the window G1st H of Chang-si, the Defendant owned by D against the Defendant based on the original copy of the instant process deed (hereinafter “instant commercial building”). The instant claim and collection order were served on the Defendant on March 11, 2019.

On March 12, 2019, the Plaintiff was rendered a decision to revise the indication of the obligor on the attached list among the instant claims seizure and collection orders by the Daegu District Court 2019Kacro 29, and the decision to revise was served on March 18, 2019 to the Defendant.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 5 (which include each number of numbers)

Each entry and the purport of the whole pleadings; hereinafter the same shall apply)

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. On November 1, 2018, the Plaintiff asserted that: (a) between D and D, the Defendant entered into a partnership business agreement to jointly operate a restaurant in the name of “I” (hereinafter “instant partnership business agreement”); and (b) a lease agreement to lease the instant commercial building with a lease term of five years (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”); and (c) D paid KRW 30,000,000,000, out of the Defendant’s investment amount under the instant business agreement, to the Defendant in lieu of the payment of KRW 30,00,000,000, out of the Defendant’s investment amount under the instant agreement.

Therefore, the defendant is the third debt of the seizure and collection order of the instant claim.