The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

1. According to the evidence Nos. 2 and 3 of the facts of recognition, the plaintiff filed an application for the seizure and collection order of the claim against C, which is based on the executory exemplification of the judgment in Busan District Court Decision 2018 tea696,000,000, the claim amount of which is KRW 39,000,000 with the Busan District Court's 2020,000,000, with the Busan District Court's branch court's 2020,000, after deducting the tax and public charges from the wages to be received every month from the defendant (main salary and allowances) and the last half of the amount to be received in June and December of each year. The above court issued the seizure and collection order as of February 3, 202 and the fact that the collection order of this case was served on February 3, 202.

2. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff, in order to preserve the claim for the purchase price of goods against C, received the instant collection order against the defendant's wage and retirement allowance claim. Thus, the defendant asserts that he is liable to pay the plaintiff the claim amount under the above collection order.

On the other hand, the defendant asserts that there is no obligation to pay the unpaid wages and retirement allowances to the plaintiff.

3. Determination

A. Even if there exists a seizure and collection order against the claim, it is nothing more than granting the creditor the right of collection of the seized claim asserted that the debtor holds against the garnishee, and it does not confirm that the existence of such right of seizure and collection has the claim against the third obligor, as alleged in that the debtor actually holds the claim.

Therefore, in the lawsuit of collection based on the collection order, the existence of the seized claim is a requisite fact, and the burden of proof is the plaintiff seeking the collection amount.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2005Da47175 Decided August 11, 2007, etc.). B.

Based on the above legal principles, the health team for the instant case.