1. The part of the claim for the collection amount in the lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3...

1. The Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion seeks payment to the Defendant of the amount stated in the claim’s claim, based on the following selective grounds.

The Plaintiff was sentenced to the judgment of Jeju District Court 2008Gadan19231 in the loan claim claim against C, which stated that “C shall pay KRW 100 million to the Plaintiff for delay,” and the Defendant was issued the order of seizure and collection as Jeju District Court 2017TTT5473 with the Defendant as the third obligor, and thus, the Defendant shall pay the collection amount to the Plaintiff.

B. On September 12, 1998, the Plaintiff lent KRW 100 million to C with the operating fund of the restaurant. At the time, the Defendant and C were married, and the loan of the operating fund of the restaurant was about the daily home affairs of C and the Defendant. Therefore, the Defendant and C jointly and severally pay KRW 100 million to the Plaintiff and its delay damages.

The defendant asserts that the claim for the payment of joint and several debt which the plaintiff selected as a joint and several debt is unlawful on the ground of the lack of identity of the previous claim and the basis of the previous claim. However, since the plaintiff's both claims are for the recovery of expenditure incurred by lending KRW 100 million to C on September 12, 1998 and are considered to relate to the same facts of living or economic interest, the plaintiff's above additional claim is deemed to be identical to the previous claim.

2. We examine ex officio the part concerning the claim for the collection amount among the instant lawsuit.

In case where a creditor who has received a collection order files a lawsuit against a third party debtor, the creditor exercises his/her claim against the third party debtor on behalf of the debtor due to the effect of the seizure and collection order. Thus, in case where there is no collection order, the creditor becomes the plaintiff himself/herself and becomes the third party to exercise his/her right against the third party debtor, and such lawsuit is unlawful. The Jeju District Court 2017TTTT 5473 cited by the plaintiff, and the seizure and seizure of the claim.