1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On November 25, 2014, the Plaintiff’s provisional attachment of claims and the seizure of claims, on November 25, 2014, issued a decision of provisional attachment of claims against the Electric Power Company, which was issued by the 2014Kadan3130 of the instant court, instead of the n&C Co., Ltd., and the said decision of provisional attachment was served on the Electric Power Company, instead of the garnishee, on November 28, 2014.

On March 17, 2015, the Plaintiff, based on this Court’s executory payment order for the 3025 tea Co., Ltd., Ltd. on March 17, 2015, issued a seizure and collection order for the claim against the Electrical Co., Ltd, as the court of this Court, based on the executory payment order for the contract deposit case.

On March 20, 2015, the above order of seizure and collection was served on the electrical company instead of the third debtor.

B. On January 15, 2015, the Defendant: (a) received a decision of provisional seizure against the claim for construction price against S&C as the claim for construction price against S&C and S&C; and (b) as the claim for construction price against S&C, the instant court rendered a decision of provisional seizure against the said claim against S&C as the claim for construction price against S&C and S&C on behalf of S&C.

The provisional attachment decision was served on the electrical company around that time, instead of the third debtor.

On March 13, 2015, the Defendant was issued a seizure and collection order to transfer the provisional seizure to the provisional seizure to the court 2015 other, 3036, based on the executory order of payment for the construction cost of the court 2015j374 against Syman C&C.

Around that time, the above seizure and collection order was served on the Daejin Electric Company, the third party director.

C. Alternative K&C Co., Ltd and L&C Co., Ltd., the deposit cause of the K&C, together with the K&C, have the construction cost claim against the depositor (22,500,000 won). The depositor's obligation is indivisible due to its nature as it is indivisible that the monetary obligation and the payment for the deposit cause of the K&C are indivisible.

However, B is the interest claim against the depositr of K&C.