The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

The instant lawsuit is dismissed.

All costs of litigation shall be borne by the plaintiff.

the purport and purpose of the claim;

Basic Facts

On November 8, 2010, the head of the tax office having jurisdiction over the Plaintiff’s distribution under the Plaintiff’s control attached table attached to C and D seized the Plaintiff’s claim for the return of the loan to C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”) with the preserved claim, and the notification of seizure was served to B around November 11, 2010.

Based on this, the Plaintiff filed a suit against B against B to the Seoul Central District Court (2013 Gohap 538923).

Accordingly, on November 22, 2013, the Seoul Central District Court rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff that “B shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 324,985,560,000 and delayed damages to this money.” The judgment became final and conclusive as it is.

On the other hand, on June 21, 2013, the head of the Seocho Tax Office under the Plaintiff attached the Plaintiff’s taxation claim against D with D as the preserved bond, and the attachment notification was served on B around June 25, 2013.

Based on this, the Plaintiff filed a suit against B against B to the Seoul Central District Court (2013 Gohap 546207).

Accordingly, on July 2, 2014, the Seoul Central District Court rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff that “B shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 1088,250,000,000 and delayed damages to this money,” and the judgment became final and conclusive as it is.

Based on each of the above final judgments, the Plaintiff filed an application for a seizure and collection order with the debtor B and the third debtor, etc. to the Seoul Central District Court (2019, 10990).

On May 27, 2019, the Seoul Central District Court issued a seizure and collection order with respect to the part of the loan repayment claims against the Defendant, and the seizure and collection order was delivered to the Defendant on May 31, 2019.

[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is lawful

A. The Defendant’s defense of this case is subject to the instant lawsuit, and the Defendant’s claim for the return of the loan to the Defendant.