2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

[Claim]

Since the plaintiff appealed against this, the subject of the judgment of this court is limited to the claim against the claims acquired from the KB Securitization 1.

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion KB Securitization 1 acquired the credit card loans of the Housing Bank against the Defendant, and the Plaintiff acquired the above bonds from KB Securitization 1, and thus, sought payment of the principal and interest of the above bonds to the Defendant.

3. According to the purport of Gap evidence No. 8-4, Gap evidence No. 9-1, 2-1, and 2, according to the purport of the whole arguments and arguments, KB-1, on May 13, 2005, KB-1, transferred credit card loan claims (principal 5,242,110 won) to the defendant from KB-1 under the Asset-Backed Securitization Act, and on the same day, it can be acknowledged that the defendant notified the transfer of claims by content-certified mail in accordance with Article 7(1) of the Asset-Backed Securitization Act, and the above notification is presumed to have reached the defendant within a reasonable period.

However, in order for the Plaintiff to seek the payment of the transfer money, the Housing Bank, which was the object of the transfer, must legally transfer the credit card loan claims against the Defendant to the Defendant to the Defendant and prove that it was notified to the Defendant. However, only with the descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 7, Gap evidence No. 8-4, and Gap evidence No. 9-1 submitted by the Plaintiff, it is insufficient to view that the credit card claims against the Defendant of the Housing Bank against the Defendant were legally transferred to the KB securitization 1, and that it was notified to the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to

In the first instance, KB National Card Co., Ltd. is available.