1. Deposit money deposited by the Suwon Agricultural Cooperative as the Geumwon District Court No. 4368 on May 15, 2014.

1. Basic facts

A. From July 9, 2013 to October 10, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendants filed an application for suspension of payment under the Special Act on the Prevention of Damage Caused by Telecommunications-based Financial Fraud and the Refund of Damage Amount with respect to the accounts of Suwon Agricultural Cooperatives.

B. On January 17, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against D seeking unjust enrichment, and paid KRW 5,030,000 to D to the Plaintiff by March 31, 2014 by the Daejeon District Court 2013Da3039, the military court granting Masan Branch of the Daejeon District Court. “D shall be granted to the Plaintiff by March 31, 2014.”

C. On April 15, 2014, the Plaintiff received a collection order for the seizure and collection of the claim amounting to KRW 5,132,860 from the obligor D, the garnishee’s agricultural cooperative, the claim amounting to KRW 5,132,860 from the Suwon District Court 2014. The decision was served on the garnishee’s Suwon Agricultural Cooperative on April 17, 2014.

On May 15, 2014, Suwon Agricultural Cooperative received a seizure and collection order as the Suwon District Court No. 4368 in 2014, and issued a mixed deposit of KRW 6,632,341 (hereinafter “instant deposit”) under Article 487 of the Civil Act and Article 248(1) of the Civil Execution Act on the ground that the creditor is identified by telephone financial fraud by Bosing.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. In a case where a debtor makes a mixed deposit due to the causes for the repayment deposit on the ground of a creditor's uncertainty under the latter part of Article 487 of the Civil Act and the causes for the execution deposit under Article 248(1) of the Civil Execution Act occur, the execution court cannot proceed with the distribution procedure unless the original creditor is confirmed to receive the amount deposited through the confirmation of invalidity, etc. of the transfer of claims, for instance, as long as the cause for the repayment deposit on the ground of the creditor's uncertainty is not established, and thus, the execution creditor is subject to seizure to receive the amount of the above deposit.