Since there is no evidence to prove the defendant's assertion, the defendant's defense is groundless.

There is no evidence to acknowledge that the claim against the defendant has expired due to repayment, and there is a duty to pay the principal to the plaintiff as the creditor of seizure and collection.

Article 42 of the National Tax Collection Act: Effect of attachment of claims

2013 Gohap16042 Collection

Korea

AAA Adjustment Association

October 16, 2013

November 13, 2013

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff ○○○○○ and the Plaintiff 25% interest per annum from X. X. to the day of full payment.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

Cheong-gu Office

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff has tax claims such as the attached list of ○○○○○ as of December 15, 200 XX with respect to Nonparty BB Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “BB”). AA is a person who entered into a business agency contract with BB with respect to a land readjustment project of KRW 19 XX, 6.3, 00,000,000,000,000,000,000 won.

B. AAB filed a lawsuit against BB seeking confirmation of the existence of the obligation with respect to the above project with Busan District Court, and BB filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the claim for construction payment as a counter-claim. With respect to the same project contract concluded on June 3, 200, between AA and BB, which was concluded on June 10, 190 in relation to the ○○○○ Land Readjustment Project executed on June 3, 200, the Defendant shall pay BB the land allotted by ○○○○○○○○ Land Readjustment Project (pate conversion price) or in cash, and in addition, the damages for delay shall be paid by adding the annual rate of 25% from June 1, 200 to the date of full payment. The above court decided that the AA and BB did not enforce any claim with respect to each contract.

C. On December 2, 190, 190, May 8, 190, November 23, 190, and December 4, 1900, the head of ○○○○○○ Tax Office under the Plaintiff-affiliated Tax Office attached the entire land to be paid by AAA to BB in accordance with the above adjustment decision of the Busan District Court’s Dong Branch branch branch branch, and upon repayment to X 31, December 2000, in order to preserve the tax claims against BB, the entire land to be paid by AA was seized, and at each time the above seizure notification was given to AA.

D. On January 14, 200, the director of the ○○○○ Tax Office again seized all of the claims against BB against AA, including national tax claims newly incurred after each of the above claims was seized, and on January 15, 200, requested collection from AA based on the above claims seizure.

[인정 근거] 다툼 없는 사실, 갑 제1〜4호증(가지번호 포함)의 각 기재, 변론 전체의 취지

2. Determination

According to the facts acknowledged above, AA is obligated to pay the Plaintiff, a creditor of the seizure and collection of the instant case, the principal amount of the construction cost obligation to BB, to the Plaintiff, at the rate of 25% per annum from X. X. X. to the date of full payment.In this regard, AA has a defense that BB’s above claims against A were extinguished due to the change of AA’s name on the land secured by the land secured by the land secured by the development recompense for land readjustment and rearrangement project district into AA, but there is no evidence to acknowledge this. Therefore, AA’s defense is without merit.

3. Conclusion

The plaintiff's claim is justified and accepted.