추심금 등
The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.
The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).
1.(a)
Article 35 of the Act on Security over Movable Property, Claims, Etc. (hereinafter “movable Claim Security Act”) provides that “The acquisition or loss of a security interest in an obligation pursuant to an agreement may be asserted against any third party other than the obligor of a nominative claim (hereinafter “third party obligor”) at the time of registration in the collateral security register.” Paragraph (2) of the same Article provides that “The person who has created a security interest or the obligor of a security interest (referring to the transferor or transferee in cases of the transfer of a security interest in an obligation) shall not oppose the third party obligor unless he/she notifies the third party obligor of the fact by establishing the registration certificate under Article 52 or the third party obligor accepts the registration certificate.” Paragraph (3) of the same Article provides that “Where the registration of the collateral security register for the same obligation and the notification or consent under Article 349 or 450 (2) of the Civil Act are made, the secured party or the assignee of a claim that is the object of the collateral may claim the right against a third party, other than the obligor, in accordance with the arrival of the registration, notification or consent thereof.”
Therefore, after the secured creditor under the Act on Security over Movable Property completes the registration of security, the assignment of claims for the same credit and the notification of the transfer of claims by means of a certificate with a fixed date reaches the third obligor, but the notification of the creation of security right under Article 35(2) of the Act on Security over Movable Property has only the assignee of claims in relation to the third obligor, while the notification of the creation of security right under Article 35(2) of the Act on Security over Movable Property is not reached the third obligor. Therefore, the third obligor can perform his/her obligations
Provided, That the transferee of the obligation shall be in relation to the secured creditor.