A. On May 19, 2017, the Defendant transferred the Defendant’s claim for the purchase price of KRW 400,000,000, which the Defendant had against B, to the Plaintiff, and notified the transfer of claim to B around that time, and the notification reached May 22, 2017.

B. B deposited KRW 400,00,000 to the Plaintiff and the Defendant on July 13, 2017, on the ground that: (a) the notice of the assignment of claims from the Defendant was received by the Seoul East Eastern District Court (Seoul East District Court Decision 2615), but the effect of the assignment of claims cannot be confirmed by the Defendant’s genuine intent; (b) the said assignment of claims cannot be confirmed; and (c) the said deposit was made on account of the impossibility of confirming

(hereinafter referred to as “instant deposit”). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 6, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. According to the facts of the above recognition, the Defendant transferred the goods payment claim against B to the Plaintiff, and transferred the goods payment claim against B to the Plaintiff according to the notification of the assignment of claims.

Therefore, the right to claim payment of the deposit money of this case is against the plaintiff.

In addition, as one of the depositors, the Plaintiff has a benefit to seek confirmation against the Defendant, who is another depositor, for the claim for the withdrawal of the deposited goods, that the claim for the withdrawal of the deposited goods of this case is against the Plaintiff.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is justified, and it is so decided as per Disposition.