1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. In order to preserve F’s claim against F, the Defendant filed an application for provisional seizure of real estate against F’s instant land with Seoul District Court 194Kadan393705, which was issued by the above court on August 1, 1994 (hereinafter “the provisional seizure order of this case”), and the Jeju District Court Seopopo District Court received on August 5, 1994 as the receipt No. 23846 on August 5, 1994.

B. As to F’s share 6,612 out of the instant land, the Plaintiff completed the registration of the right to claim transfer of ownership on December 23, 2014 under the Plaintiff’s name on December 24, 2014, and completed the principal registration on the basis of the said provisional registration on March 3, 2017, on the ground of the completion of the pre-sale agreement as of April 23, 2015 under the Plaintiff’s name.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 evidence, purport of whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment that the claim amount of provisional seizure against real estate conducted by the defendant on the land of this case is 43,530,000, and that the provisional seizure of this case is null and void since the above amount was paid in the public sale procedure of F's shares among H forest in Seopo-si, Seopo-si.

However, in full view of the purport of the arguments in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, in the main lawsuit of the decision on provisional seizure of this case ( party members 94da90799), F, on Nov. 22, 1995, ordered the Defendant to pay the amount of KRW 39.4 million to KRW 37,000 and KRW 2.4 million per annum from March 19, 1991, and from March 9, 37,000 until each full payment date, the above judgment becomes final and conclusive at that time, and it can be acknowledged that the Defendant recovered KRW 43,530,000 through the public sale of the above Seopo Forest on Nov. 20, 209.

Of the above judgment amount, the damages for delay incurred until November 20, 2009 exceeds the above recovered amount, and the recovered amount was first appropriated for damages for delay among the defendant's principal and interest.

Therefore, the claim amount of the provisional attachment decision of this case still remains without full completion.