1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The plaintiff's assertion is a creditor of D Co., Ltd. (former trade name: E Co., Ltd.; hereinafter referred to as "non-party Co., Ltd."), and as a creditor of the non-party Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "non-party Co., Ltd.") received a seizure and collection order, which transferred a provisional seizure to the defendant of the non-party Co., Ltd., and the order was served on the defendant. Thus, the defendant is liable to pay the above money

B. On May 31, 2016, the Plaintiff received a provisional attachment order issued on August 31, 2016 by the Seoul Western District Court 2016Kadan51316, which issued a provisional attachment order against the Defendant of the non-party company, the garnishee, the Defendant, the claim amounting to KRW 14,372,223, and served the decision on June 8, 2016 on the Defendant. After which the Plaintiff served on the non-party company as the Defendant on June 8, 2016, based on an executory copy of the judgment with the Suwon District Court 2017Kadan512920, Suwon District Court 2017, based on the executory copy of the judgment with the Seoul Western District Court 2017Kadan5630, which transferred the provisional attachment to the Defendant on August 31, 2017, and the order was served on the Defendant on August 31, 2017.

However, in a lawsuit for collection, the existence of a claim for collection is a requisite fact and the burden of proof is the plaintiff.

It is not sufficient to recognize that there exists a claim for construction cost against D at the time of the provisional seizure of the above claim, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise. The above evidence is insufficient to acknowledge that there is a claim for construction cost due to the above provisional seizure of the claim.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.