beta
Text
1. The Defendant against the Plaintiff on December 11, 2014, the Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2014.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendant supplied the goods for the supply of NAP Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “NP”) to the non-party company Maricodicom (hereinafter “non-party company”), but did not receive any amount equivalent to the price. As such, on August 31, 2014, the Defendant acquired KRW 203,335,000 of the price for the goods to be supplied to the non-party company’s NAP, and the assignment of the above claims by the non-party company was based on the same year.
9. 26. It was notified to the NAN.
B. The Plaintiff was unable to receive the amount of KRW 31,805,960 from the non-party company, and the debtor was the non-party company and the third debtor, and was subject to the Seoul Southern District Court 2014Kadan6132 on September 16, 2014. The above decision was served on the NAP on the 19th day of the same month.
C. On October 1, 2014, the non-party company sent to NAP a written agreement to terminate the transfer and takeover of claims to the effect that, as the contract for the transfer and takeover of claims with the defendant was terminated by agreement, the remainder of the goods except the amount of senior provisional seizure would be paid to him/her.
On October 13, 2014, the Plaintiff received an order for the payment of goods from Nonparty Company, which was issued by the Seoul Southern District Court 2014Guj53182 on October 13, 2014, but the above payment order became final and conclusive on November 4, 201 of the same year as the Nonparty Company did not raise any objection. Based on the above payment order’s original copy, the Plaintiff received the order for the seizure and collection of the claim to transfer the provisional seizure to the Seoul Southern District Court 2014 TaT23137 on December 26, 201, and the above order was served on the NAP on
E. The Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2014Kadan6195 decided on the provisional seizure of claims and the provisional seizure of claims against the non-party company, as well as the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and the Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2014Kadan7381 decided on September 26, 2014, which decided on November 24, 2014.
F. The NAV transferred the claim for the price of goods to the Defendant by the non-party company based on a non-assignment agreement with itself.