1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant filed an application with the Plaintiff for a payment order claiming payment of the Plaintiff at the rate of 15% per annum from the day following the delivery of the payment order for the loans of KRW 40 million and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of KRW 15% per annum from the day of the delivery of the payment order for the loans to the day of full payment. The above payment order was finalized on November 10, 2015.

(hereinafter “instant payment order”). B.

Based on the instant payment order, the Defendant received a seizure and collection order as to the claim for construction price against the Plaintiff, which the Plaintiff had against the Ulsan-gun, by the court No. 2015TT1584.

C. Around January 5, 2016, the Defendant transferred to D the claims indicated in the order of seizure and collection, and the notification reached the Plaintiff around that time.

The seizure of the plaintiff's claim for the construction price against Ulsan-gun was conducted in line with E.

In the above procedure, D received dividends of KRW 32,371,324 in the qualification of the defendant as the assignee of the seized claims.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, each entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including provisional number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination ex officio as to the legitimacy of a lawsuit

A. In a case where a claim on the title of enforcement of the relevant legal doctrine is transferred to satisfy the requirements for setting up against the assignee, the standing to sue is changed to the assignee, and the assignee becomes final and conclusive as the assignee according to the succession execution clause. As such, the existing title of enforcement against the transferor shall be extinguished due to the grant of the succeeded execution clause.

Therefore, a subsequent suit of objection filed against a transferor is unlawful as there is no benefit in the protection of rights, by filing a lawsuit against a non-qualified person or seeking the exclusion of executive titles whose executive force has already been extinguished. Such legal doctrine is the original copy of a written decision of performance recommendation without having to be separately granted an execution clause pursuant to Article 5-8(1) of the said Act, such as a final decision of performance recommendation under the Trial of Small Claims Act.