1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant A”) was provisionally executed on March 28, 2017 by Suwon District Court Decision 2016Da513230 Decided March 28, 2017 (hereinafter “the instant judgment”). On April 19, 2017, the Suwon District Court issued a collection order or a collection order (hereinafter “instant collection order”) with respect to the claim of KRW 80,018,051, among the construction cost claims that the Plaintiff (debtor) shall receive from Seocheon-si (third obligor) in relation to C Corporation, as the claim of KRW 20,018,051, among the construction cost claims that the Plaintiff (debtor) shall receive from Seocheon-si (third obligor) in relation to C Corporation. The said collection order reached Seocheon-si, etc. around that time.

B. On August 22, 2017, the Defendants drafted a cash payment certificate (hereinafter “instant cash payment certificate”) with the following content to the Plaintiff.

The terms and conditions are paid by August 23, 2017 in cash as stated above, Japan, one million won ( e.g. 15,000,000). The cash payment certificate of this case according to the collection order of this case stated in Defendant A only as “the amount seized” but the meaning thereof is the amount seized according to the collection order of this case. However, there is no dispute between the parties that it is the amount seized according to the collection order of this case.

At the same time as the deposit takes effect, the cash payment which was made at the time of the unpaid payment shall be null and void. The payer on August 22, 2017: Defendant A/Surety: Defendant B Han.

C. On August 29, 2017, Defendant A received KRW 80,018,051 from Busan City according to the instant collection order.

The judgment of this case was dismissed in entirety the Plaintiff’s appeal (Supreme Court Decision 2017Na62051) and the final appeal (Supreme Court Decision 2018Da236388). The judgment of this case became final and conclusive August 21, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1-4 evidence, Eul 3 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion applied for the suspension of compulsory execution against the judgment of this case, etc., and thus, the Plaintiff was an insolvent financial institution to prevent execution according to the collection order of this case.