1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The head of Songpa-gu determined the payment deadline of KRW 67,132,080 of the local income tax on global income for the year 2003 as of June 30, 201, and imposed each tax imposed and collected on the Plaintiff as of July 31, 2012 by setting the payment deadline of KRW 2,753,650 of the global income tax on global income for the year 2008 on July 10, 201, but the Plaintiff did not pay the said amount.

B. On March 25, 2015, the Defendant seized Plaintiff’s claim for return of deposit (the new bank, account number B, and hereinafter “instant deposit”) and collected KRW 24,510 on August 2016, and applied it to the amount of delinquent tax, and cancelled the attachment on September 7, 2016.

(hereinafter “instant disposition of seizure of deposit”). C.

On July 28, 2015, the Defendant seized KRW 130,190 of the Plaintiff’s local tax refund from Songpa-gu Office, and applied it to the delinquent tax amount on July 31, 2015, and cancelled the attachment.

(hereinafter “Disposition for Attachment of Refund in this case”). 【No dispute exists, Gap’s 2, 3, and 4, Eul’s 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. To make entries in the attached statutes concerned;

3. Whether each of the attachment dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (i.e., the disposition of the seizure of the instant deposit) is a deposit with the minimum cost of living less than 1.5 million won, which is prohibited from seizure.

(2) Information (e.g., tax item, year to which the tax amount in arrears belongs, period of payment, etc.) on the notification of attachment to a third debtor was omitted, and it is insufficient to recognize it as a legitimate notification of attachment because the plaintiff is not specified, and the legality of attachment cannot be determined on the ground that the relevant notification of attachment cannot be confirmed.

③ Since 74,785,100 won out of the amount in arrears of the Plaintiff’s cancellation of the disposition on deficits and the notification of cancellation of the disposition on deficits was not made even though the disposition on deficits was made, the disposition on cancellation of the disposition on deficits is invalid

④ Therefore, the attachment disposition of the instant deposit is null and void.

2. The disposition of the refund of this case (1) on December 27, 2016.