1. As to the Defendant’s ground of appeal

A. “Quasi-Possessor of a claim” under Article 470 of the Civil Act refers to a person who has an external appearance to believe that he/she has a legitimate authority to exercise a claim in light of the general transactional concept, and, inasmuch as performance to quasi-Possessor of a claim is in good faith and without negligence, performance to quasi-Possessor of the claim is effective, the obligor is exempted from its obligation (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Da54055, Dec. 12, 2013).

The judgment below

The reasoning and the evidence duly admitted by the court below reveal the following facts.

(1) On August 12, 2003, H and G, an employee of L Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “L”) established for the purpose of real estate sale, etc., purchased KRW 2,406,776 square meters (15,309.16 square meters, 4,631 square meters) and KRW 603 square meters (182.4 square meters, 2,406,70,000 (hereinafter “the first sale contract of this case”) among the shares of 32,620 square meters (hereinafter “the Defendant’s representative director at the time”) of I forest land in Yong-si (hereinafter “the instant land”). From the Defendant, H and G purchased KRW 52,589,68 square meters of land in this case (hereinafter “the purchase contract of this case”) from the Defendant’s 2,406,701,000 (hereinafter “the instant land”).

(2) On March 16, 2004, G withdrawn from each of the instant sales contracts under the consent of E and the Defendant (hereinafter “Defendant, etc.”). H established a right to collateral security on the instant land according to an agreement with the Defendant, etc., and borrowed a loan of KRW 1.4 billion as security, and paid the remainder to E and the Defendant. As a result, H received payment of KRW 1,726,701,00, which is part of the price of the instant sales contract, and the Defendant received KRW 2,618,254,00,000, which is the full payment of the instant sales contract.

(3) N, who is the representative director of L, is himself on May 13, 2004.