1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

purport, purport, and.

1. After remanding the case, the plaintiff filed a claim for the implementation of the public auction procedure, the payment of indirect compulsory performance, and the payment of damages at the first instance court, and the court of first instance dismissed all the plaintiff's claim.

In this regard, the Plaintiff appealed the entire appeal, and the court of first instance prior to the remand revoked the claim for the implementation of the public auction procedure among the judgment of the court of first instance, and accepted the Plaintiff’s claim on this part, but dismissed the appeal on the part of the claim for indirect compulsory payment and damages.

Only the defendant appealed against the judgment prior to remand, and the Supreme Court reversed and remanded only the part against the defendant prior to remand.

Therefore, while the part of the plaintiff's claim for indirect compulsory payment and compensation for damages was dismissed in the first instance judgment before dismissal and remanding, the plaintiff's claim for the payment of indirect compulsory payment and compensation for damages became final and conclusive due to no appeal, only the part of the claim for the implementation of the public auction

2. Basic facts

A. 1) Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”) which is a contractor for another canal wells project implemented by the Hancheon-si Department A (hereinafter “B”).

On May 19, 2009, under the joint and several sureties’s joint and several sureties of the Intervenor joining the Defendant (mutual Co., Ltd. prior to the alteration), the Defendant loaned KRW 24 billion from the Plaintiff, and as a security therefor, the land A and 19 parcels, both of which are located outside the Sincheon-si (hereinafter “the land”).

2) On May 27, 2010, the Defendant’s Intervenor entered into a credit transaction agreement (hereinafter “the instant credit transaction agreement”) with the Plaintiff to obtain a loan of KRW 24 billion from the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s Intervenor made a credit transaction agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s Intervenor on May 27, 2010, on which the Plaintiff would receive a loan of KRW 24 billion as the first priority beneficiary and the Defendant’s Intervenor as the second priority beneficiary. On the same day, the Defendant paid the said loan by subrogation for the said loan.