1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On September 17, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Incheon District Court for the attachment and collection order of the claim against D as the obligor, and the third obligor against D as the obligor. On September 21, 2018, the Plaintiff issued the attachment and collection order of the claim against D to KRW 123,722,024 out of the claim against D for the purchase of the goods against the Defendant, and the claim against D to KRW 123,72,02,024 among the claim against the purchase of the goods against the three presses. The written decision was served on the Defendant on October 1, 2018.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap 1, 2, Eul 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserts that according to the above collection order, the defendant should pay to the plaintiff 123,722,024 won and damages for delay.

On the other hand, the facts supporting the establishment of the claim against the defendant, who is the garnishee of the debtor attached in the lawsuit for collection based on the collection order based on the seizure and collection order, are proved by the plaintiff, who is the creditor (see Supreme Court Decisions 2013Da40476, Jun. 11, 2015; 2005Da47175, Jan. 11, 2007). Gap evidence 8-1 prepared by the plaintiff, and Eul evidence 9-1 prepared by the defendant, who is an employee of the E company, who is an employee of the plaintiff, and who is an employee of the E company with the same interest with the plaintiff, cannot be trusted as it is, and there is no other evidence to prove that the defendant agreed to pay D the amount of 8 punishment for taking-off type 8 punishment and the amount of goods at presses for three goods.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

3. According to the conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is without merit.