The amended 'EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT BENEFIT SECURITY ACT' (hereinafter "the Law") provides that the retirement pension plan should fall into one of the three forms which are (i) a defined benefit retirement pension plan||| (ii) a defined contribution retirement pension plan and (iii) an individual retirement pension plan. To comply with the Law||| an employer who sets up retirement pension plan should enter into a contract (of both the implementation of operational management services and the provision of asset management services) with a retirement pension trustee for the purpose of safe management of the reserved cash. Article 24 of the enforcement decree of this Law enacts that "the plan should be structured so that a pension holder could demand the payment of his/her retirement pension directly to a retirement pension trustee". However||| what is usually seen in operation is that a pension holder (employee) demands the payment of retirement pension to his/her employer who then demands the retirement pension trustee to make the same payment to the pension holder. Due to the misalignment of the regulation with the scene in operation||| it is not crystal clear against whom the pension holder is entitled to claim for the payment of the retirement pension. Come to think of it||| as for the case of a defined benefit retirement pension plan||| a pension holder is entitled to claim the payment against both the employee and the retirement pension trustee. It is because (i) the pension holder is sitting in a status of the beneficiary under the asset management services contract which should be assuming the form of either an insurance agreement or a trustee agreement between the employer and the trustee||| and that (ii) the employer is the last resort obligor of the retirement pension payment to the employee. In contrast||| in the case of a defined contribution retirement pension plan||| it can be construed that the pension holder is entitled to claim against the retirement pension trustee only because the employer is deemed to have fulfilled its obligation once the total sum of its contribution has been paid. As per the pension holder's claim against the retirement pension trustee||| however||| there is an issue when it comes to the case of a defined benefit retirement pension plan. Since it is the employer who is the party to the asset management services contract and that the cash is reserved as a whole in an account under the name of the employer||| the retirement pension trustee is not able to figure out the exact amount of each individual's retirement pension amount without the involvement of the employer. Meanwhile||| this issue of against whom the pension holder is entitled to claim the payment expands to the issue of the order of the attachment on the retirement pension and the third debtor. Since the creditor of the employee (debtor) does not have any knowledge to which retirement pension trustee the employer of the debtor has entered into a contract||| the creditor files an attachment on the retirement pension of the debtor with the employer as the third debtor. However||| the court's order of attachment in this accordance is only effective on the employer and not the retirement pension trustee. To extend the effect to the retirement pension trustee||| (i) the Civil Execution Act should be amended to expand the effect of such order of attachment to the retirement pension trustee and/or (ii) there should be a legal basis for the creditor of the employee can access to the information of the employee's retirement pension to the extent including the identification of the trustee.