양수금
1. The part concerning the conjunctive claim in the judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows:
Plaintiff
A. Preliminary.
1. In the first instance trial, the Plaintiffs asserted that they are the Plaintiffs and the substantial parties agreed with the Defendant, and sought payment of the agreed amount pursuant to the agreement against the Defendant. ② The Plaintiffs sought the payment of the transferred amount on the ground that they acquired the claim for the agreed amount.
In this regard, the first instance court dismissed the plaintiffs' primary claim, and dismissed the part of KRW 203,927,027 of the plaintiffs' conjunctive claim, and accepted the principal and partial damages for delay from the rest of the plaintiffs' conjunctive claim and dismissed the remainder damages for delay.
Since only the defendant appealed, the scope of the trial of this court is the preliminary claim which is part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant.
2. The reasoning for this Court’s explanation is as follows: (a) the part of “(based on recognition”) Nos. 15 and 16 of the judgment of the court of first instance (based on recognition)” is the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the part(s) as “the part(s)” under the following. Therefore, this part is cited pursuant to the main text of Article 420
[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 through 6, 13, Eul evidence 1 through 4, and 7 (which include each number; hereinafter the same shall apply)
3) Each entry, part of the testimony by J of the first instance and the first instance trial witness, and the purport of the whole pleadings
3. Determination
A. The plaintiffs' assertion are conjunctively asserted that among the claims of this case under the assignment contract of this case, the plaintiff A acquired KRW 400 million and the plaintiff B acquired KRW 300 million from among the claims of this case, and completed the notification. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the above acquisition amount to the plaintiffs.
B. According to the facts found in the facts based on the determination as to the cause of the claim, H transferred KRW 400 million out of the instant claim to the Plaintiff A and KRW 300 million to the Plaintiff B on October 31, 2014, and notified the Defendant of the assignment of the said claim. As such, the Defendant was specially liable.