A. On September 10, 2018, C sent a postal item (credit transfer notice, No. 1 certificate) to the Defendant on August 31, 2018, which contains the purport that the claim of KRW 32,000,000 against the Plaintiff was transferred to the Defendant as a result of the substitute payment construction cost (the cost for accommodation repair work at a Kaf D D D D cafeteria) provided at the time the Plaintiff’s full-time director was employed.

The above postal items were sent to the Plaintiff around that time.

B. The above notice of assignment of claims is issued by E in the future of “F”;

D. A written estimate of KRW 31,500,000 for 31,50,000 for cafeteria repair work (the document No. 2 of the date of preparation of the document No. 2 of the year is written in 2016, and the monthly date is in the official column) and E is accompanied by a receipt of KRW 31,50,000 issued in C of July 10, 2014 (the document No. 3 of the document No. 3 of the document).

[Reasons for Recognition] Documents Nos. 1, 2, and 3

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserted that the defendant acquired the claim for the transfer-in payment amounting to KRW 32,00,000,000 which C had against the plaintiff, while C does not have the claim for the transfer-in payment against the plaintiff, and the plaintiff does not bear the obligation for the transfer-in payment against the defendant.

Meanwhile, the Defendant asserts that C is liable to pay the Plaintiff the acquisition amount of KRW 32,00,000,000 and damages for delay thereof, on behalf of the Plaintiff, for the repair work cost for the part of the “D” portion of the first floor of F building, to the Plaintiff. However, C acquired the above claim against the Plaintiff and completed the procedure for giving notice of assignment of the claim. Therefore, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff the acquisition amount of KRW 32,00,000 and the damages for delay.

B. In a lawsuit seeking confirmation of the existence of a pecuniary obligation of the relevant legal doctrine, if the Plaintiff, who is the debtor, denies the fact of the occurrence of the obligation by specifying the first claim, the Defendant, the creditor, bears the burden of assertion and burden of proof as to the requirement of legal relationship.