1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The Defendants asserted that the Plaintiff had received from the Cheongju District Court an order of provisional injunction against the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Company D (hereinafter “D”) on two occasions based on the decision of provisional injunction (2014Kahap155; hereinafter “the instant provisional injunction order”) and the decision of indirect compulsory enforcement (E), and collected the money stated in each claim from the financial institutions that are the third obligor, as described in Appendix 1 and 2.

However, the Defendants collected the amount of money collected by the Defendants as above without proving the existence of the violation of indirect compulsory performance from the Cheongju District Court, and based on the above, it constitutes unjust enrichment, and even if the above execution clause is not illegally issued, the number of business days operated by F, a lessee of the Plaintiff, in violation of the provisional disposition order of this case, is less than 53 days compared to the Defendants’ assertion. Thus, the Defendants should return the amount of money collected to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment.

B. In light of the determination, in order for the creditor to enforce a decision of indirect compulsory performance on the obligation of omission as an executive title, an execution clause should be obtained. Since a debtor’s breach of duty constitutes a condition to enforce a decision of indirect compulsory performance on the obligation of omission, the creditor may obtain an execution clause proving the fulfillment of the condition, in accordance with Article 30(2) of the Civil Execution Act.

In addition, whether the condition, which is the requirement for granting a execution clause, is fulfilled or not, matters to be asserted and examined in a lawsuit of demurrer against the grant of execution clause related to the grant of execution clause or in a lawsuit of objection against the grant of execution clause, and matters to be deliberated in a lawsuit of objection seeking the exclusion of executive force held by executive titles on the ground of an objection raised

Supreme Court Decision 201No. 13.4.