1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 10, 2012, the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff entered into a contract for construction works between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff, from September 10, 2012, from the Construction of the Right to Demand Redemption (hereinafter “Construction of the Right to Demand Redemption”) to the construction of the Bank of Bonds (hereinafter “Construction of the Right to Demand Redemption”), the construction of new warehouses 1 and 2 and the construction of a new warehouse and a new dormitory located in the Seocho-Eup, Gwangju-si (hereinafter “Construction of the Right to Demand Redemption”), the construction cost of KRW 30 million (excluding additional tax) and the construction period from September 10, 2012 to October 31, 2012.

On December 11, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract to amend the terms of extending the above construction period until March 31, 2013, and reducing the construction price from KRW 330 million to KRW 243 million (Additional Tax Table) from KRW 330 million (Additional Tax Table) to KRW 200,000 (Additional Tax Table).

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant printing team construction contract” between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff have concluded the instant printing team construction contract.

(1) After the lapse of a collection order for the seizure and collection of claims, the Plaintiff was unable to receive the construction cost under the instant order, and the Incheon District Court 2013 Gohap21259 filed a claim for the payment of the construction cost. On April 23, 2014, the said court rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff that “the construction of the exercise of rights is 142,090,909, and the delay payment is paid to the Plaintiff,” and the said judgment became final and conclusive on May 16, 2014.

(2) Based on the above executory judgment, the Plaintiff seized each claim against KRW 71,045,45,454 of the claim for the construction of the right to rescission based on the contract for the construction of the debtor's right to rescission, the third debtor company and the defendant, and the claim amount of KRW 142,090,90,90 based on the contract for the construction of the right to rescission and new construction of a warehouse and a dormitory between the defendant and the defendant in Gwangju-si, which entered into between the defendant and the construction of the right to rescission and the contract for the construction of a new warehouse and a dormitory in Gwangju-si, which entered into between the defendant and the defendant.