The judgment below

The part against the defendant is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to Busan District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. According to the reasoning of the lower judgment and the record, as to the ground of appeal No. 1, the following facts are revealed: (a) several recommendations and orders for seizure and collection as well as the disposition of national taxes in arrears regarding the share of the Young-gu Housing Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Y

However, in the instant case, the Plaintiff did not seek the payment of the amount of deposit claims based on the share of the Young River, but rather sought the payment of the amount of deposit claims based on the share of the school juristic person which is the Korea Institute of Property and Agriculture (hereinafter “Korea Institute of Property and Agriculture”) regarding the instant deposit claims, and the effect of the seizure and collection order on the share of the Young River as to the instant deposit claims and the disposition of national taxes in arrears is not less than the share of the Korea Institute of Property and Agriculture. Thus, the Plaintiff cannot be deemed eligible to bring the instant lawsuit on the ground that there was a seizure and collection order and a disposition of national taxes in arrears

This part of the grounds of appeal cannot be accepted.

2. Regarding ground of appeal No. 2

A. On the grounds indicated in its reasoning, the lower court: (a) assumed that, based on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, the Military Service University and the Military Service University held the instant deposit claim in duplicate; and (b) on the premise that, due to the failure of the Korea Public Service University to pay monthly rent up to the instant deposit deposit amount, the relationship between the Korea Public Service and the Plaintiff did not change to the fact that the Korea Public Service University did not have a security deposit deposit amount to be returned from the Plaintiff; and (c) on the ground that the Korea Public Service University transferred one half of the instant deposit claim to the Plaintiff, and the transfer of the instant deposit claim to the Defendant.