1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the following additional judgments are added to the reasoning of the court of first instance. Thus, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

【Additional Judgment】

A. The gist of the Defendant’s counterclaim claim was that the Defendant supplied clothing to F Co., Ltd. from March 2012 to August 2012, but did not receive approximately KRW 575,500,541, even though he supplied clothing to H., G, the representative director of the said company, lent the name of H, and established a personal business entity called “I” in its name and deducted approximately KRW 470,000 to 480,000 from 470 to 480,000, which the said company was in possession for the purpose of evading compulsory execution from the creditors of the said company. After that, G converted the said H as a corporate entity of J on the ground of the above H as its representative director.

Around that time, the Plaintiff did not supply 90,914 gyds from G to F Co., Ltd., but instead falsely tending or supplied to P Co., Ltd., as if it were supplied to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff drafted a false tax invoice for confirmation of the fact of transactions or a false tax invoice upon request of the Plaintiff, as if it had been supplied more than the actual amount of supply.

As such, while G’s transfer of the 90,914 Hah-kak, which it had been owned by F, to the ownership of J Co., Ltd., the Defendant, the creditor of the purchase price for the goods against F, could not enforce a compulsory execution against the Hah-kak, in cooperation with the Plaintiff in the above way.

Therefore, the Plaintiff involved in the evasion of compulsory execution by G, which is a tort, is liable to compensate the Defendant for the amount of KRW 239,512,322 equivalent to the market price of the 90,914 Had's Mad's Mad's 90,914 and interest

B. Generally, the infringement of a claim by a third party may constitute a tort, but the infringement of a claim by a third party does not always constitute a tort, but is in the form of a claim infringement.