1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Under the facts based on the facts, the Defendant submitted an application for postponement only on the date of pleading on July 6, 2017, and did not dispute the Plaintiff’s assertion on the date of pleading, and thus, the confession is deemed to have been made.

A. The Plaintiff has a claim for damage amounting to KRW 50 million against Nonparty Co., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Co., Ltd.”).

B. The non-party company entered into a real estate lease agreement with the Defendant on the Gyeonggi-do B B large 279 square meters (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) owned by the Defendant, and had the right to refund the deposit to the Defendant upon the termination of the lease agreement. The Plaintiff filed an application for provisional attachment against the Defendant of the non-party company on November 4, 2014, for the provisional attachment of the claim amounting to KRW 50 million, out of the claim to return the lease deposit against the Defendant.

C. However, with respect to the instant real estate and C ditch 597 square meters owned by the Defendant, Suwon District Court D, Sung-nam branching the Sungwon District Court, the auction procedure of real estate rental was conducted, and on August 12, 2016, the real estate rental was sold to the Seoul Special Self-Governing Province Co., Ltd., Ltd., and on the same day, the ownership was transferred to the

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Plaintiff received the provisional attachment order against the Defendant of the non-party company regarding KRW 50 million, among the lease deposit repayment claims against the non-party company. Since the instant real estate owned by the Defendant was sold to the other party during the auction procedure for real estate rent and the leased real estate itself became nonexistent, the Defendant is obligated to compensate the Plaintiff for the damages for the amount of KRW 50 million, out of the refund claims of the above lease deposit repayment claim

B. Even based on the plaintiff's assertion, the defendant, who is the garnishee of the provisional attachment decision, is liable to compensate the plaintiff as the provisional attachment obligee.