1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On the basis of an executory exemplification of the judgment rendered by the Gwangju District Court Decision 2014Gahap1565, the Plaintiff filed an application for the seizure and collection order against the amount until the amount claimed is KRW 162,930,927, out of the successful bid price leased by the Defendant for a compulsory auction of real estate D real estate to be returned by the Defendant, with the obligor C, based on the executory exemplification of the judgment rendered by the Gwangju District Court Decision 2014Gahap1565, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for the seizure and collection order against the amount claimed in KRW 162,930,927, and as stated in January 9, 2018, issued the seizure and collection order (hereinafter “instant seizure and collection order”). As such, the instant claims were served on the Defendant on January 11, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant paid the proceeds from the compulsory auction of real estate D in the above court with the borrowed money borrowed from C. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the money stated in the claim to the plaintiff who received the seizure and collection order of this case.

B. The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, including evidence Nos. 1 through 14 (each number includes each number), is insufficient to acknowledge the fact that the Defendant borrowed the money claimed by the Plaintiff from C, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

3. According to the conclusion, C’s claim for collection of the instant amount cannot be accepted, and it is dismissed as it is based on the premise that C had a loan claim against the Defendant, as alleged by the Plaintiff.