1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an investor and creditor of C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”), and the Defendant is a company established to settle investors’ losses by acquiring C’s affiliates and D’s assets on June 17, 200, as D’s representative director was bound by the crime of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement), etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) and the investors did not recover their investments.

B. On May 15, 2014, the Plaintiff issued a seizure and collection order (hereinafter “instant collection order”) against C’s credit against C by virtue of an executory exemplification of the loan case No. 2001 tea 25061, May 15, 2014, with respect to KRW 335,010,404 among the credit against C’s Defendant, and the instant collection order was served on the Defendant, who is the garnishee, on June 16, 2014.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The parties’ assertion 1) Plaintiff C established the Defendant for the purpose of compensating for the loss of investors (victims) and entrusted the custody of the assets. However, the Defendant’s representative director, etc. is the FF Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”).

The Defendant embezzled the Defendant’s funds of KRW 5.8 billion by arbitrarily remitting or directly withdrawing the assets acquired from the Defendant from the Defendant to the F’s deposit account. Since assets embezzled and concealed by the Defendant’s representative director, etc. are all the money to be returned to C, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the collection amount of KRW 335,010,404 according to the instant collection order, and damages for delay thereof. (ii) The Defendant is not obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the Defendant’s obligations to the Defendant C.

B. We examine the judgment, and even if there is money that the defendant manages and disposes of the assets acquired from C and keeps, C may seek the return of the money unless the defendant separately agrees to C as the return cycle.