1. The part dismissing the plaintiff's claim among the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked, and the lawsuit of this case corresponding to that part shall be revoked.

1. The reasoning for this part of the judgment by the court is as follows: (a) the “basic fact” portion of the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance (from the second to the third to the third below) is the same as the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance; and (b) thus, it shall be cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

2. Determination as to the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit

(a) There is no benefit to seek non-permission of the compulsory execution by a lawsuit of demurrer any longer after the creditor obtains the satisfaction after the compulsory execution based on the executive titles has been completed as a whole;

(See Supreme Court Decision 96Da52489 delivered on April 25, 1997). Moreover, since there is no benefit to a lawsuit seeking the denial of compulsory execution with respect to the part on which compulsory execution under the executive title has been terminated, the propriety of the claim ought to be deliberated and determined only on the part on which the execution has not yet been terminated.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Da82043, May 29, 2014). Therefore, first, we examine the details of the Defendant’s compulsory execution first.

B. The claim of this case due to the defendant's compulsory execution 1) The defendant's compulsory execution evidence Nos. 3, 5, 7, and Eul Nos. 1 through 5 (if there are serial numbers, each statement included in each number), the deceased's judgment of this case as the executive title, and the deceased's compulsory execution is acknowledged through the application for the seizure and assignment order of claim or the compulsory auction of real estate as shown below.

On the other hand, when an assignment order on a claim becomes final and conclusive, the seized claim naturally transfers it to the entire creditor within the scope of execution claim retrospectively from the time when the assignment order was served on the third debtor, and simultaneously takes effect of the extinction of execution claim. Therefore, in cases of compulsory execution under an assignment order, the date on which the assignment order was served on the third debtor

The service date or the execution date of the assignment order against the third debtor.