1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The Jeonju District Court Decision 2012Kadan4529 decided November 27, 2012 against the Defendant’s Plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 13, 2012, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiffs as Jeonju District Court 2012Kadan4529, the lower court rendered a judgment on November 27, 2012 that “The Defendant (the Plaintiffs) deliver to the Plaintiff (the Defendant) a 10,173 log or container for the recovery of carbon gas, and if it is impossible to enforce the compulsory execution of the said co-ship or container delivery, it shall pay the amount of 3,500 won per co-ship or container” (hereinafter “instant judgment”), and the said judgment became final and conclusive on January 8, 2013.

The above court served the original copy of the judgment to the plaintiffs, but the service of the plaintiffs was impossible due to the addressee's unknown information, and on December 10, 2012, the court ordered the plaintiffs to serve the original copy by public notice, and on December 25, 2012, the judgment of this case became final and conclusive on January 8, 2013.

Therefore, although the Plaintiffs submitted a written appeal for the subsequent completion to the above court on September 16, 2013, the appeal was dismissed on the ground that the subsequent completion of the appeal did not meet the requirements for the subsequent completion, and the Plaintiffs re-appeal, but the appeal was dismissed on October 30, 2014.

B. Although the judgment of this case became final and conclusive, the Plaintiffs did not deliver the coaches or containers, the Defendant was granted the execution clause to the instant judgment from the Jeonju District Court on July 1, 2014. On October 15, 2014, the enforcement officer belonging to the Jeju District Court, which was subsequently delegated by the Defendant, prepared a protocol of non-delivery of corporeal movables, stating that the execution officer of the instant judgment was impossible because the Plaintiffs and the Defendant did not appear in the Jeju District Court on October 15, 2014 at the Jeju District Court, which was the execution place, the object of delivery of executive titles, and there was no non-performance of the corporeal movables (10,17

(No. 2014No. 1038). (c)

On the other hand, around November 6, 2014 and December 2, 2014, the Plaintiffs are attorneys-F of the law office E, delegated by the Defendant with the obligation of collecting claims.