매매대금
1. All appeals by the defendant against the plaintiffs are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
purport, purport, and.
1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, except for the case of additional determination as to the Defendant’s assertion that is emphasized by this court under paragraph (2) below, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420
2. Additional determination
A. The Defendant’s argument settlement agreement of this case is a transfer of the Defendant’s claim against E in lieu of paying the Defendant’s debt to the Plaintiffs.
In the settlement agreement, the settlement agreement has stipulated the phrase “the remaining debt amount”.
The plaintiffs also filed a lawsuit against E seeking payment of USD 800,000 in total, and received a favorable judgment. Since September 2017, the defendant's debt only remains USD 200,000 in relation to the plaintiff B.
B. 1) Determination 1) There is no dispute between the parties that the applicable law to interpretation of legal relations under the instant sales contract and the instant decommissioning contract is the law of the Republic of Korea. According to the legal principles established in the Republic of Korea, it is presumed that the obligor’s transfer of other claims to the obligee in connection with the repayment of obligations is a transfer by means of a security for repayment of obligations or a repayment method, barring special circumstances. Thus, in such a case, it cannot be deemed that the original claim is extinguished if the assignment of claims is transferred, and the obligor is exempted from the obligation only when the obligee receives the repayment of the transferred claims, and the obligor bears the burden of proof as to the repayment of the transferred claims (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2012Da4098, May 9, 2013; 93Da50291, 50307, Feb. 8, 1994).