1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. In the lawsuit of divorce and consolation money, etc. filed by the Defendant against the Plaintiff, the Seoul High Court rendered a judgment on December 10, 2015 that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant the amount of KRW 702,00,000 as division of property and the amount calculated by the rate of 5% per annum from the day following the day when the judgment became final and conclusive to the day of full payment” (hereinafter “instant judgment”), and the said judgment was finalized on May 4, 2016.

B. Meanwhile, prior to the judgment of this case, the Defendant filed an application for provisional seizure of real estate with the Seoul Family Court 2013 business group779, the sum of the solatium and the amount of division of property, which was KRW 1,154,660,000, as the claimed amount, and received the decision of provisional seizure. The Plaintiff deposited the amount equivalent to the above claimed amount as the amount of provisional seizure (hereinafter “instant deposit”).

C. On May 30, 2016, the Plaintiff, as Seoul Family Court 2015 business group841, filed an application for a provisional attachment objection against the above provisional attachment order, and received a decision from the above court to revoke the above provisional attachment order as to the portion exceeding KRW 702,00,000, which is the quoted amount of the instant judgment, and recovered the amount exceeding KRW 702,000,000 from the deposited amount, and collected the deposit amount of this case to KRW 702,00,000.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 8, purport of the whole pleadings

2. As of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the amount equivalent to KRW 702,00,00, which is the cited amount of the judgment of this case, remains, and the Defendant may obtain a seizure and collection order of the instant deposit or exercise its rights by submitting a written consent to cancel the provisional seizure and to cancel the security, etc., but the Defendant may receive the instant deposit from the Plaintiff by abusing its rights by delaying the above exercise of rights. However, the Defendant directly pays the cited amount of the judgment of this case to the Plaintiff, who intends to abuse its rights and receive the delayed payment amount equivalent to the damages for delay based on the instant judgment