Judgment by deemed confession of applicable provisions of Acts (Article 208 (3) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. Claim against the defendant B

A. On October 20, 2008, the Plaintiff (the Plaintiff Company G) transferred the claim amounting to KRW 50 million to his H to Defendant B (hereinafter “transfer of claim of this case”).

(2) On November 19, 2008, Defendant B received the notification of transfer from H on December 15, 2008 (Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2008Kadan72630, hereinafter “instant provisional seizure”) and the said decision reached H on December 17, 2008.

3) Around 2009, H deposited each of the deposits (mix deposits) as shown in the attached Tables 1 and 2 as the Plaintiff, Defendant B, and Defendant C, on the ground that the assignment of assignment and provisional seizure are concurrent with respect to the cost of processing costs to be paid to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “each of the instant deposits”).

(i) [The facts without dispute over the basis of recognition, entry of Gap 1, 2, Eul 1 to 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

B. After the Plaintiff’s claim is transferred to the assignment of the claim, Defendant B thought it difficult to claim the transfer amount due to the above assignment of claim, and thus, Defendant B issued the provisional seizure of the claim against the Plaintiff, which did not deduct the transfer amount.

After that, rehabilitation procedures began with respect to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff paid the debt to the defendant B with the permission of the court for early repayment. The right to pay each of the deposits in this case is the plaintiff.

C. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, Gap's evidence Nos. 3 and 7, after the assignment of the claim of this case, the rehabilitation procedure commenced on February 25, 201 with Daegu District Court 2010 Gohap56, and the plaintiff's obligations against the defendant B under the rehabilitation plan.