1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Basic Facts

On September 16, 2010, an authentic deed was drawn up between SviaC Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “SviaC”) and B and C with the effect that the notary public lent KRW 3.3 billion to B and C on September 16, 2010.

On September 10, 2015, the Defendant acquired all of the claims on the Notarial Deed from Esvian on the same date.

(2) On February 11, 2016, the Plaintiff received the order of seizure and collection (hereinafter “instant order of seizure and collection”) from the Defendant at the Incheon District Court 201j 8012, the Plaintiff received the order of execution of the guaranteed debt of the Incheon District Court 201j 8012, and issued the order of execution of the guaranteed debt to the Defendant at the Incheon District Court 2016TT 2255, for the amount equal to KRW 247,701,953 of the instant bond assignment claim against the Defendant at the time of the order of execution of the guaranteed debt of the instant case. The seizure and collection of the instant case was served to the Defendant around that time.

[Ground of recognition] In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 4, 7, 8, 9, 13, and 14, and the plaintiff's assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings, the seizure and collection order of this case was confirmed. Thus, the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the collection amount of KRW 247,701, 953 and delay damages.

The Defendant asserted that the transfer price of the instant claim was paid to D and E, not E, but E.

Therefore, SBC does not have a claim for payment based on the assignment of the instant claim against the Defendant. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim for collection is without merit, since there is no claim for seizure and collection order of the instant case.

Judgment

In a collection lawsuit based on the collection order, the existence of the seized claim shall be attested by the creditor.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Da40476, Jun. 11, 2015). According to the following: (a) whether there exists a claim subject to seizure and collection order; (b) the description of the evidence Nos. 1 through 5; and (c) the testimony and oral argument of the witness F.