1. The Defendant’s KRW 6,105,067 as well as the Plaintiff’s KRW 5% per annum from November 21, 2014 to November 24, 2015.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff: (a) based on the executory order of the executory order in the claim for reimbursement amount of the Suwon District Court Decision 2005Da14377, Jun. 1, 2005; (b) based on the executory order of payment for the claim amounting to KRW 40,00,000 among the total amount of KRW 30,736,60,609,636, the principal amount of KRW 56,636, the collection cost of KRW 32,400,000, which was the claim amount of KRW 32,40,000, which was to be paid to the Defendant by the Defendant; (c) seized the amount of the insurance money to be paid to the Defendant at present or in the future (including maturity and early termination money); and (d) served the Defendant on March 17, 2014 (hereinafter “instant collection order”).

C. On the other hand, on May 7, 1995, A entered into a royalty insurance policy with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant insurance”). The main contents of the instant insurance are as follows.

1) Commencement of a pension: A, the insured on May 7, 2039 (year 60), and the due date: on December 31, 31, 2099 (Life : B: A, the beneficiary of the insured on December 31, 31, 209: The insured amount covered by the insurance contract amount: A (explic life, injury by hospitalization), statutory inheritor (Death): KRW 30 million under a prime contract, KRW 30 million under a special contract for cancer security, KRW 40 million under a special contract for cancer security, KRW 30 million: Insurance premium amounting to KRW 47,100, KRW 5,400 under a special contract for cancer security, KRW 3,100,000 under a special contract for cancer security, and KRW 5,100,000 under a special contract for hospitalization, and KRW 5,000: The insurance

If the insurance contract of this case is terminated as of November 20, 2014 when the payment order of this case was delivered to the defendant, the cancellation refund of the insurance of this case is 12,210,135 won.

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. 1) The parties’ assertion that part of the instant insurance contract exists, even though the nature of the instant insurance is a savings insurance. As such, the exercise of the right to collect the instant insurance against the termination refund of the instant insurance is not restricted. 2) The Defendant’s assertion that the instant insurance contract guarantees the death, injury, disease, accident, etc. of a person.