1. Upon receipt of a claim changed in exchange at the trial court, the defendant shall set aside the Suwon District Court Ansan Branch of 2012 Tayang Branch of 19652.

1. The reasoning of the court of first instance for the acceptance of the judgment is as follows: (a) the part of the 5th judgment of the court of first instance, “as such, the defendant has a duty to report the reason,” which stated in the 12-16th judgment as follows; and (b) the defendant’s argument added in the court of first instance as to the defendant’s argument added in the court of first instance is identical to the statement of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus,

Inasmuch as the Defendant made the demand for distribution of this case, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant shall deposit the said KRW 485,505,166 as well as damages for delay at the rate of 5% per annum as prescribed by the Civil Act from October 17, 2014 to the date on which the Defendant made a deposit and the report on the reason for the deposit from the date of collection to the date on which the Defendant made a report on the reason for the deposit and the report on the reason thereof.”

2. Additional determination

A. On November 28, 2012, the Defendant asserted on the following: (a) transferred KRW 485,493,725 to the Defendant: (b) the total amount of the goods and the total amount of the contractual processing claims against C&T, the subject of the instant collection order; and (c) notified C&T of the transfer of the claims to C&T.

Ultimately, on December 6, 2013, the Defendant received KRW 485,505,166 from the above sea bank deposit money, and received the above transfer claim. Accordingly, the Defendant extinguished the price of the goods and the claim for the processing of the goods against Han C& S. C&T.

Therefore, it is reasonable to deem that the defendant has no obligation to report the deposit and reason for the collection according to the collection order of this case.

B. We examine the judgment, and even if the defendant concurrently holds the position of the assignee and the status of the collection obligee in light of the nature of the debt collection procedure as a compulsory execution procedure, it is reasonable to view that the defendant has a duty to deposit the collection money and report the reason as long as the defendant collected the claim in the position of the collection obligee according to the collection order in

The defendant's argument is with merit.