1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. Attachment and auction 1) Dongwon Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “foreign company”) for corporeal movables owned by the debtor

(A) The notary public against A shall have the law firm C-C, D, E, F, and G (hereinafter “H farm”) in the name of title with the notarial deed No. 635 of the 2012 C-C, D, E, F, and G (hereinafter “H farm”).

) 600 mas, Y, K, and L (hereinafter referred to as “M farm”) located in 600 mas, Mas- Eup I, J, K, and L.

) 500ma, N,O, P, Q, and R (hereinafter referred to as “S farm”).

3) As to the instant corporeal movables by combining the said pigs 1,600 mars (hereinafter referred to as “the instant corporeal movables”).

2) On June 18, 2013, the execution officer filed a motion to seize the instant corporeal movables under this Court No. 2013 copies277, and the execution officer seized the instant corporeal movables (hereinafter “instant corporeal movables”).

(2) On August 7, 2013, the execution officer attached the instant corporeal movables (hereinafter “the second seizure”) on the following grounds: (a) a notary public against A filed an application for seizure with the competent court for the instant corporeal movables in the H,M, andS farm, in the title of execution, with the notarial deed No. 698 of 2013, a notary public against A, as the title of title; (b) a notary public against A filed an application for seizure of the instant corporeal movables in the H,M, andS farm owned by A; and (c) A renounced the management and custody of the instant corporeal movables; and (d) a renounced the management and custody of the instant corporeal movables, entrusted the Plaintiff with the management and custody of the instant corporeal movables.

3) Meanwhile, on July 24, 2013, a certified public appraiser belonging to the T appraiser’s office assessed the market price of the instant corporeal movables as KRW 609,00,000 on the basis of the first seizure protocol on July 23, 2013. On August 22, 2013, an execution officer tried to proceed with the designated sale date for the instant corporeal movables on the H,M, andS farm. On the grounds that a number of persons under the title of the said order interfere with auction due to verbal abuse, assault, etc., the Plaintiff was unable to conduct the sale and postponed ex officio the sale date. (4) On August 26, 2013, the Plaintiff had a large amount of expenses for the management and custody of the instant corporeal movables.