1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. In full view of the respective descriptions of evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 and the purport of the entire pleadings, the following facts are recognized.

A. The Plaintiff holds claims against Nonparty C in the amount equivalent to KRW 51,442,350, as the Seocheon-gun District Court 2018 tea147, Seocheon-gun, Seocheon-gun, Daejeon District Court for red support to Nonparty C.

B. Meanwhile, the Defendant, while constructing a new house in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, contracted the construction to the said C.

The particulars of the construction claimed by the Defendant are as follows:

Details of construction: 120,000 won on February 1, 2019 and on May 30, 2019 on the date of completion.

C. On the other hand, on April 23, 2019, the Plaintiff was rendered a ruling of seizure and collection equivalent to KRW 51,442,350 as to the claim for the construction payment against the Defendant by Hongsung Branch of the Daejeon District Court 2019TT 8084.

The decision was served on April 26, 2019 on the defendant.

2. The party's assertion and judgment

A. The construction completion of the Plaintiff’s assertion (i.e., the Plaintiff’s assertion) was completed on May 30, 2019, and the said decision was served on the Defendant on April 26, 2019.

In general, the payment of the construction cost is normal, and the construction has not been completed at the time, and the considerable amount of the construction cost has not been paid.

The Defendant has already paid the construction cost to C.

The defendant is a person who has not paid the value-added tax of at least 12 million won to C, and the defendant is liable to pay the collection amount to the plaintiff.

The construction cost claimed by the defendant was already paid to C before the above attachment and collection decision was served, and C was not a person who was in a position to issue a tax invoice because it was not registered as a bad credit holder.

In addition, at the time of the above construction, both employment insurance and industrial accident insurance have been made in the name of the defendant, and C cannot claim value-added tax against the defendant, so there is no claim subject to seizure or collection.

Therefore, the defendant.