1. E on October 18, 2016, the par value of which is KRW 123,00,000, and the addressee network A, the place of issue, the place of payment, and the place of payment for the net A.

Facts of recognition

The Plaintiff owned the loan claim amounting to KRW 200 million against E, and on November 17, 2016, the Plaintiff received a collection order for the seizure and collection of the claim amounting to KRW 200 million for the wage claim against the CM architect (hereinafter “CM architect”) Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”).

E, on October 18, 2016, at the same time, issued one copy of promissory note as of October 25, 2016 (hereinafter “instant promissory note”) at the face value of 123,00,000,000, the deceased, the place of issuance, the place of payment, and the place of payment to the deceased, and the Busan Metropolitan City, the date of payment, and a notary public, as of October 25, 2016, written an authentic deed of promissory note as of 869, 2016.

On November 14, 2016, the Deceased received an execution clause as to the above notarial deed and issued an attachment and assignment order (Seoul District Court 2016TTTT21877) as to the claim in the attached list owned by the non-party company of which E is a garnishee, and the above order became final and conclusive around that time.

Accordingly, the Deceased was paid KRW 14,114,204 from November 2016 to August 2017 by Nonparty Company out of the bonds listed in the separate sheet.

On the other hand, the deceased died during the course of the instant lawsuit, and C and D, the spouse of the deceased, took over the instant lawsuit.

[Reasons for Recognition] The court shall prepare a notarial deed stating the purport of accepting compulsory execution as to the existing debt in order for an obligor in excess of his/her obligation to obtain actual repayment through compulsory execution procedures by being subject to seizure and assignment order for the claim held by the specific obligee concerning the existing debt in excess of whether a fraudulent act has been established or not, as a whole, as stated in the evidence of subparagraphs A1 through 3 and the purport of the whole pleadings.