1. The Defendant’s 33,569,250 won and its 15% per annum from April 8, 2017 to the full payment date.

According to the evidence and the purport of the argument submitted by the Plaintiffs, the Plaintiffs are employees who entered into a labor contract with G engaged in the vessel parts design business, etc. under the trade name of “F,” and G held 3,569,250 won claims against the Defendant as working fees, etc. for the vessel machinery and materials. The Plaintiffs are acknowledged to have received claims against the Defendant regarding overdue wages from G on March 20, 2017 (hereinafter “transfer of claims”) and notified the Defendant of the transfer of claims against the Defendant on March 21, 2017, and notified the Defendant of the transfer of claims and received the notification from G to the Defendant on March 21, 2017.

According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiffs 3,569,250 won and damages for delay at the rate of 15% per annum from April 8, 2017 to the date following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case.

Although the defendant asserts that the assignment of the above assignment has no effect since the transferor did not notify the transferor G of the transfer, the defendant is entitled to receive the notification from the transferor and notify the assignee of the claim. As such, the plaintiffs' right to notify was delegated by G. Therefore, the above assertion is without merit.

The Defendant, on the ground that the instant claim assignment agreement against the Plaintiffs constituted a fraudulent act detrimental to the creditors against G (this Court Decision 2017Da15514), and that some favorable rulings were rendered, the Defendant asserted to the effect that the Defendant cannot pay the total amount of the claim that was acquired to the Plaintiffs. However, the revocation of a fraudulent act is relative because it is relative, and the validity is only effective between H and the Plaintiffs, a creditor, and that it does not affect the instant claim assignment agreement between the Defendant or the Defendant, a debtor, G and the Plaintiffs, and thus, the Defendant’s above assertion is rejected.

In addition, assigned claims.