1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant was supplied with aggregate for construction from February 2014 to March 2, 2014 by Company A (hereinafter “A”). At the time, the Defendant’s obligation to pay to Company A was KRW 240,660,970.

B. On April 28, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for provisional attachment against A with the Defendant for a claim for the transportation cost of KRW 61,953,980 against A as a preserved right, with the Ulsan District Court Decision 2014Kadan1335, the Plaintiff filed an application for provisional attachment against the Defendant of the instant goods cost claim (hereinafter “instant goods cost claim”). On May 15, 2014, the said court accepted the Plaintiff’s application and rendered the provisional attachment order against the claim (hereinafter “provisional attachment against the instant claim”) on May 30, 2014. The said order was served on the Defendant on May 30, 2014.

C. On February 29, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit with the Ulsan District Court 2016Da4265, Ulsan District Court (hereinafter “A”) seeking payment of the transport cost. On July 8, 2016, the said court rendered a judgment that “A shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount calculated at the rate of KRW 61,953,980 and 15% per annum from June 9, 2016 to the date of full payment,” and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

On July 27, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for the seizure and collection order of the instant goods payment claim with the amount of KRW 61,953,980,980, the transport price claim of KRW 63,422,285, which is the sum of KRW 63,468,30, and damages for delay from the date of filing the application for the above judgment, with the Ulsan District Court Decision 2016Tan District Court Decision 2016Ma8259, supra. On August 5, 2016, the court issued an application for the seizure and collection order of the instant goods payment claim of KRW 61,953,980, and the remainder of KRW 1,468,30,05, which shall be transferred to the original seizure. The obligee may collect the seized claims, and the collection order of this case was served on the Defendant on August 9, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination: