1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the costs of supplementary participation.

1. Acknowledgement of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the written reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the following parts to be cited or added. Thus, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The second page of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be written with the following "the second page":

On September 20, 2006, the F Bank deposit claims of the 1F Bank on September 20, 2006 on the date of cancellation of seizure of seized articles: (a) on May 3, 2009, the refund for cancellation of insurance cancellation at the post office on May 7, 2009; (b) on May 4, 2011, the refund for cancellation of the insurance cancellation at the post office on May 30, 201; (c) on September 26, 2016, the automobile (D) on September 26, 2016; and (d) on March 15, 2019, the following: (d) the Plaintiff’s seizure on the Plaintiff’s deposit claims was conducted on September 20, 209 to collect the resident tax of this case;

7.14.Releases. However, a “transferr” is added, for which five years have passed thereafter.

The 5th to 6th of the judgment of the first instance court shall be in accordance with the following subparagraphs.

“2) As to this, the Plaintiff asserts to the effect that the F Bank deposit claims and the refund money for cancellation of insurance at a post office, which are subject to seizure, constitute the refund money for cancellation of a guarantee insurance contract, the balance of which is less than 1.2 million won by each individual and the amount of which is less than three million won, and thus, constitutes a claim for prohibition of seizure pursuant to Article 31 subparagraph 13 of the former National Tax Collection Act (amended by Act No. 14040, Mar. 2, 2016; hereinafter the same shall apply) and Article 36 of the former Enforcement Decree of the National Tax Collection Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 24367, Feb. 15, 2013; hereinafter the same shall apply

However, Article 31 subparagraph 13 of the former National Tax Collection Act (amended by Act No. 8832 of Dec. 31, 2007) is a newly established provision, which was newly established pursuant to the National Tax Collection Act (amended by Act No. 8832 of Dec. 31, 2007), and the defendant joining the defendant cannot be subject to the prohibition of seizure under Article 31 subparagraph 13 of the former National Tax Collection Act as of September 20,

The plaintiff also on December 31, 2007, Article 31 subparagraph 13 of the former National Tax Collection Act.