The judgment of the first instance court is modified as follows. A.

Of the instant lawsuits, KRW 1,009,074,290 among the instant lawsuits and their related thereto.

1. The reasoning for this part of the underlying facts is as stated in Paragraph 1 of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for a partial dismissal as follows. Thus, the reasoning for this part is as stated in the judgment of the first instance.

The 5th to 6th of the first instance judgment shall be followed by the following:

E. The Plaintiff, by November 30, 201, on behalf of the Defendant, completed the sale-sale business of the apartment of this case under the instant contract. (F) The Plaintiff was paid KRW 6,300,000,000 on October 1, 201, and KRW 5,000,000 on October 31, 201, and KRW 300,000,000 on January 17, 201, and KRW 6,300,00,000 on behalf of the Defendant, and KRW 30,00,00,000 on behalf of the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff’s creditor obtained the above order of seizure and collection from the Gwangju District Court’s 201,5454, which had been pending in the instant lawsuit, including the Plaintiff’s claim and the Defendant’s 30,000,000 won, and KRW 20,000,000,000 from the Defendant’s 21.

2. Ex officio determination as to whether the part, among the instant lawsuit, which became the object of the seizure and collection order, is lawful

A. If there exists a seizure and collection order on the relevant legal doctrine claims, only the collection obligee may file a lawsuit for performance against the garnishee.