1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On January 3, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Seoul Central District Court for the attachment and assignment order against the obligee, the Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) and the Defendant as the garnishee, “The amount until C requested KRW 225,936,835 with respect to the claim and the future claim with respect to the sales claim against the Defendant.” On January 3, 2019, the said court issued a ruling accepting the Plaintiff’s application for the attachment and assignment order (hereinafter “instant attachment and collection order”).

B. On January 10, 2019, the instant order of seizure and collection was served on the Defendant.

C. Meanwhile, on November 19, 2015, the Defendant concluded a security trust agreement with Gangnam-si D and two parcels with the Defendant as the trustee, and completed the trust registration in the name of the Defendant on the same day. On February 5, 2016, the Defendant concluded a contract to change the said security trust agreement to the sale management trust (hereinafter “instant trust agreement”) and completed the registration of change in the trust ledger.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence 1, Eul's evidence 1 and 2 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The defendant claiming the plaintiff is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 225,936,835, which is the claim amount according to the collection order and the seizure and collection order of this case, and the damages for delay.

B. Defendant 1) There is no sales claim against Defendant C, which is the claim subject to the seizure and collection order of this case. 2) If it is deemed that the claim subject to the seizure and collection order of this case is a revenue claim under the trust contract of this case against Defendant C, the settlement of accounts under the trust contract of this case is not completed, and thus, C’s claim against Defendant was not finalized, and it is anticipated that there is no sales claim even in the future settlement, and thus, the Defendant is anticipated that there is no sales claim.