1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On April 26, 2005, in the process of taking over and recovering non-performing loans from a new bank (former Cho Jae-gu), Defendant B, a representative director, and appointed as a liquidator (hereinafter “foreign special purpose company”) received credit card bonds (principal amounting to KRW 5,066,100) from the Plaintiff of the new bank, and filed a lawsuit seeking payment, and subsequently won the Seoul East Eastern District Court Decision 2004Gaso251903 (hereinafter “related judgment”).

B. Thereafter, the above claim was transferred to C&B Investment Loan Co., Ltd., and C&B Investment Loan Co., Ltd., based on the relevant judgment on July 12, 2010, issued a claim seizure and collection order issued by Seoul Eastern District Court 2010TT1761, and seized the Plaintiff’s account with respect to the financial institution.

C. On June 21, 2013, the above claim held by C&B Investment Loan Co., Ltd. was transferred to the National D&C Investment Fund, and the National D&C Fund filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the interruption of extinctive prescription, and was rendered a favorable judgment on June 24, 2016 by Seoul Eastern District Court Decision 2015Da5378936.

On October 30, 2016, the Plaintiff received a favorable judgment from the non-party special purpose company in the absence of the knowledge of filing a lawsuit on the wind that the Plaintiff was dismissed on October 30, 2016, and filed a subsequent appeal by asserting that the judgment is invalid. However, on June 16, 2017, the appellate court (Seoul East Eastern District Court 2016Na6387), however, dismissed the claim of the non-party special purpose company on the ground that the claim of the Korean happiness Fund (Seoul East Eastern District Court 2016Na6387), which is the succeeding intervenor, is valid.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 5 through 12, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserted and judged that the non-party special purpose company illegally acquired the relevant judgment.