1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On December 8, 2009, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against C with Seoul Southern District Court 2009Da31486, and the said court rendered a judgment that “C shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 13,500,000 and the amount calculated by the rate of 6% per annum from September 14, 2001 to August 4, 2009, and 20% per annum from August 5, 2009 to the date of full payment.” The said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

B. The Plaintiff, based on the executory exemplification of the judgment in the above Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2009Da31486, supra, applied for a seizure and collection order under this Court 2013TTTT1275, and on May 7, 2013, issued a seizure and collection order (hereinafter “the instant collection order”) against the Defendant as to the “claim from the time when the amount reaches KRW 29,760,000, out of the claim for the lease deposit of the building D D building in Gyeonggi-gu,” against the Defendant from this court on May 7, 2013. The instant collection order was served on the Defendant on June 18, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion asserts that the defendant is obligated to pay 29,760,000 won and delay damages to the plaintiff according to the collection order of this case.

However, in a lawsuit for collection, the existence of a claim for collection is a requisite fact and the burden of proof exists on the plaintiff (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Da47175, Jan. 11, 2007). There is no evidence to acknowledge that C leased a building of Gyeonggi-gu D from the defendant.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit.