1. Of the instant lawsuits, 50,645,590 won and damages for delay shall be dismissed.

2. The defendant.

1. Determination as to the legitimacy of the claim portion of KRW 50,645,590 among the instant lawsuit

(a) When the claims are seized in accordance with the procedure for disposition on default as provided for in the National Tax Collection Act and the attachment notice is given to the obligor of the seized claims, the chief of a tax office may obtain the right to collect such claims by subrogation of the obligee who is the defaulted taxpayer, and

Such matters pertaining to the qualifications of parties shall be examined and determined by the court ex officio as to the requirements of litigation.

[Supreme Court Decision 2014Da67188, 2014Da67195 (Counterclaim) Decided March 12, 2015] B.

(1) According to the purport of the Plaintiff’s evidence Nos. 6-1 and 2 as well as the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant on September 6, 2016 against the Plaintiff seeking payment of KRW 232,700,000 of the amount payable for the instant construction cost and the delayed payment damages. Meanwhile, on April 6, 2015, in order to collect KRW 50,645,590 of the Plaintiff’s amount of national tax in arrears against the Defendant, the head of the Seodaemun-gu District Tax Office attached the “amount equivalent to the amount of national tax in arrears (including the increased additional tax and expenses for disposition on default added thereto)” under the National Tax Collection Act, and thereafter, can be acknowledged that the notice of the attachment of claims by the head of Seo-gu District Tax Office was served on the Defendant, the garnishee.

According to the above facts, the Plaintiff lost the standing to seek implementation of the claim amounting to KRW 50,645,590, which was seized according to the disposition procedure for arrears among the accounts payable for the construction cost of this case.

(2) On January 2016, the Plaintiff asserted to the effect that all of the taxes in arrears were paid in KRW 49,478,720. However, even if the Plaintiff paid the taxes in arrears in the Seogju Tax Office, the effect of the seizure is limited to the total amount of the claims subject to seizure, so the Plaintiff’s allegation is rejected.

C. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s lawsuit of this case is subject to the procedure of arrears disposition.