A. On December 24, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with an open source-based company (hereinafter “open source-based company”) to supply mileages, etc. for the business “HUS 150 supply of domestic and overseas supplies” with the Plaintiff, and completed the supply on February 18, 2014.

B. On April 10, 2014, the Plaintiff acquired a claim against the Defendant of Open License in lieu of payment of KRW 106,408,000 as above, and the Defendant accepted the claim on June 3, 2014.

On June 10, 2014, the Plaintiff received delegation from an open source service, and notified the Defendant of the fact of assignment of claims by content-certified mail, and this mail reaches the Defendant on June 11, 2014.

C. The Defendant held a claim amounting to KRW 264,339,680 against the Defendant. On April 8, 2014, the Defendant received a provisional attachment order of KRW 37,927,179 (Seoul Southern District Court 2014Kadan2367), KRW 19,826,290 (court 2014Kadan2993), and KRW 16,219,250 (Seoul Northern District Court 2014Kadan2380), and KRW 139,83 (Seoul Northern District Court 2014dan2368) against the said claim on May 15, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to Gap evidence 13, Eul evidence 1-1 to Eul evidence 3-3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant is obligated to pay the said money and its delay damages to the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff received KRW 106,408,00 from an open source.

B. The order between the assignee of a claim and the executor of a provisional attachment or an order of seizure with respect to the same claim is determined by the date and time when the notification of the assignment of claim with a fixed date reaches the obligor, and by the date and time when the decision copy of the provisional attachment or order of seizure reaches the garnishee (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 93Da2423, Apr. 26, 1994). As seen earlier, the Plaintiff on June 10, 2014.