1. The plaintiff's action against the defendant A shall be dismissed.

2. Defendant B’s branch court of Changwon District Court for the Plaintiff.

1. On May 16, 2014, Defendant A applied for a payment order against the Plaintiff seeking payment of usage fees under the title of the original district court through the original district court, the branch court, and Defendant A received the payment order ordering the Plaintiff to pay “49 million won and the amount calculated by the rate of 20% per annum from May 23, 2014 to the date of complete payment.” The instant payment order became final and conclusive on June 6, 2014 due to the Plaintiff’s failure to raise an objection. Defendant A transferred a claim based on the instant payment order to Defendant B on September 7, 2016, and notified the Plaintiff on September 8, 2016 to the purport that the assignment of claims was granted with respect to the instant transfer of claims under the title of the instant payment order to the Plaintiff on September 23, 2016 [the purport that Defendant A’s successor to the title of claims was granted with respect to the instant transfer of claims under the title of the original district court.”

2. Where the Plaintiff’s claim under the executive title regarding the legitimacy of the lawsuit against Defendant A is transferred to satisfy the requirements for setting up against the assignee, the standing to be a party to the execution is changed to the assignee, and the execution creditor is determined as the assignee according to the fact that the assignee obtains the succession execution clause, and thus, the existing executive title against the transferor is extinguished due to the grant of

Therefore, a subsequent suit of objection filed against a transferor is unlawful as there is no benefit of protection of rights, because it is filed against a non-qualified person, or seeks to exclude executive force of executive titles already extinguished.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da23889, Feb. 1, 2008). In light of the above legal principles, ex officio, Defendant A transferred a claim based on the instant payment order to Defendant B, and notified the Plaintiff of the transfer of the claim. Accordingly, Defendant B was granted the succeeding execution clause regarding the instant payment order, as recognized earlier.