The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Suwon District Court Panel Division.

Judgment ex officio is made.

If there exists a seizure and collection order for the claim, only the collection creditor may file a lawsuit for performance against the garnishee. The existence of such status as the party to the lawsuit is an ex officio examination, and the court shall investigate and determine it ex officio, even if there is no assertion by the

(See Supreme Court Decision 2000Da25866 Decided April 12, 2002). Meanwhile, in cases where a creditor received a seizure and collection order based on the title and transferred the claim under the title, if the transferee of the claim did not receive an execution clause on succession to the existing title, if the transferee of the claim did not receive an execution clause on succession to the existing title, it cannot be deemed that the creditor has the ability to collect the seized claim in the position

(2) On August 11, 2008, the lower court’s judgment and the record reveals that, in accordance with the foregoing executory protocol (hereinafter “instant enforcement title”), an AEEM Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “AEEM”) filed a claim for the purchase price of No. 2009Gahap332 against AEM 200,000, and filed a claim for the purchase price of No. 3332, Jan. 9, 2010 and paid AEM KRW 106,30,90 to AEM 20,000. The lower court and the record reveals that the AEM’s transfer of an executory title to the Defendant based on the above executory protocol to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant enforcement title”), the AEM 206,306,90,000 won of the instant claim and the instant collection order were transferred to the Defendant, and the attachment and collection order was transferred to the Defendant.

The above facts are in line with the legal principles as seen earlier.