1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows: (a) No. 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance is dismissed as “the establishment and scope of the Defendant’s liability for damages”; (b) No. 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows; and (c) No. 2 of the judgment of the court of first instance added “B transferred the ownership of the construction machinery of this case to C without the entry registration of the provisional seizure of this case due to the negligence of the public official belonging to the Defendant, and the execution of the provisional seizure of this case was not effective,” and (c) except for adding the judgment as follows, they are cited as it is in accordance

2. The addition of judgment;

A. The defendant asserted that, if the provisional attachment registration of this case was completed, B could not transfer the construction machinery of this case to C in excess of the value of the construction machinery of this case, and that, in the case where compulsory execution was conducted while the seizure registration was continued with respect to the construction machinery of this case, the provisional attachment registration of this case was completed, even if it could not be distributed to the plaintiff, and that the damage to the plaintiff did not occur to the plaintiff. However, as seen above, as long as the construction machinery of this case was transferred to C, the time when the actual loss caused by the tort of this case was determined is the time when the construction machinery of this case was transferred to C, it shall be based on the condition of the construction machinery of this case at the time when the damage occurred, namely, senior collateral security, etc., was extinguished, but the judgment of the court of first instance, which calculated the plaintiff's damage by the method of restricting the defendant's liability, is not acceptable.

B. The Defendant, after receiving the decision of provisional seizure of this case, has confirmed the payment order against B on November 27, 2015, and the requirements for this execution can be executed.