A. On June 29, 2016, C filed a lawsuit for the return of the right of lease and the transfer price, etc. against the Defendant, etc. with the Suwon District Court Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Office C rendered a judgment in favor of the said court on October 8, 2013 that “the Defendant shall pay C money calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from October 9, 2013 with respect to KRW 58,483,402 and KRW 50 million from the date of complete payment, 1,696,902 from October 9, 2013; 6,786,500 from April 4, 2014 to June 29, 2016; and 15% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.”

The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

B. On March 18, 2016, C transferred KRW 50 million to the Plaintiff, among the claims held against the Defendant based on the above judgment (hereinafter “instant claims”), and the same year.

6. 28. The Defendant notified the Defendant of the purport of the assignment of claims by content-certified mail and sent the notice to the Defendant following the following day.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4 (including branch numbers in case of additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff who acquired the instant claim the amount of KRW 50 million and delay damages calculated at the rate of 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from August 13, 2016 to the day of full payment, as the Plaintiff seeks.

3. The defendant's assertion argues that since the defendant satisfied the claim of this case to D according to the seizure and collection order regarding the claim of this case received by D, which is another creditor of C, from the court, the defendant cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim of this case.

The order of seizure and collection between the person who received the order of seizure and collection for the same claim as the transferee of the claim is the same as the transferee of the claim, and the notification of the transfer with the fixed date and the original order of seizure and collection.