1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 10, 2012, the Defendant concluded a construction contract with respect to reinforced concrete construction works (hereinafter “instant construction works”) among the construction works for complex urban-type residential building in Yongsan-dong (hereinafter “the instant construction works”) on September 10, 2012 to August 31, 2013, and the construction cost of KRW 1.38 million. On June 7, 2013, the Nonparty waived the instant construction works.

B. Accordingly, on June 28, 2013, the Defendant, the Nonparty Company, and B (mutually “C”) settled the remaining term amount of KRW 1.25,060,060. The Defendant and B concluded a construction contract by changing the construction period of the remaining construction works from March 5, 2013 to August 31, 2013 and the construction price of KRW 669,100,00,00 for the construction work.

C. Meanwhile, as of March 5, 2013, the Incheon District Court Decision 2013TT 2307 rendered an order of seizure and assignment for KRW 1.25 million among the claims for construction payment against the Defendant of the non-party company, and the decision was served on the Defendant on March 9, 2013, and became final and conclusive around that time.

On October 31, 2013, the Plaintiff received a seizure and collection order (2013TTT 12779), and served the Defendant on November 4, 2013, regarding KRW 17,744,512, out of the claim for construction price against the Defendant of the non-party company, from the vice branch of the Incheon District Court.

【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 through 6 (including additional evidence, if any) and the purport of whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff received a seizure and collection order as to KRW 17,744,512, among the claim for construction price against the defendant of the non-party company, and served the decision on the defendant, the defendant is obligated to pay the above collection amount and damages for delay to the plaintiff.

B. According to the above facts of recognition, before being served with the Plaintiff’s order of seizure and collection, KRW 1.25 billion out of the construction price against the Defendant of the non-party company, which is the same claim.