1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff still holds the claim amounting to KRW 205,637,596 on the basis of the principal amount, even if excluding KRW 105,00,000,000, which was the claim of the claim of the assignment order of claim attachment and assignment order of the Seoul Central District Court 2014TTTTTT 2015, and the claim of KRW 205,637,596 on the basis of Samyang Development Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “TTTT”). Since Samyang Development is currently insolvent, the Plaintiff exercised the right to claim the return of KRW 105,00,000, which was owned by

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the amount stated in the purport of the claim.

B. The Defendant’s assertion that the amount reserved by the Defendant was KRW 105,00,000, not KRW 63,549,062, and the said amount was lawfully terminated the subcontract agreement between the Defendant and Samyang Development, and the Defendant confiscated it, and there is no subrogation claim against the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim should be dismissed.

2. In the creditor subrogation lawsuit, the existence of a performance bond repayment claim amounting to KRW 105,00,000 against the defendant of Samyang Development in this case is insufficient to acknowledge the existence of a performance bond repayment claim amounting to KRW 105,00,000 against the defendant of Samyang Development. However, there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge the existence of a performance bond repayment claim amounting to KRW 105,00,000 against the defendant of Samyang Development solely with the statement of evidence No. 2, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Rather, according to the purport of the evidence Nos. 1 through 11 (including each number) and the entire pleadings, the Defendant’s reserved money as a performance bond is not KRW 105,00,000,000, but was 63,549,062, and the subcontract between the Defendant and Samyang Development was terminated due to the causes attributable to Samyang Development, and it is only recognized that the Defendant lawfully confiscated KRW 63,549,062, which the Defendant reserved as the performance bond under the said subcontract agreement.

Therefore, it is a subrogation claim.