1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Basic Facts

A. On July 25, 2016, the Plaintiff was transferred KRW 363,530,893 out of the goods payment claim against Defendant D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant D”) with G (hereinafter “G”).

B. On August 9, 2016, the Plaintiff issued a notice of the assignment of claims to G by mail proving the content of the said paragraph in his own name, and at the time, the notice was not accompanied by Defendant D’s power of attorney. However, there was a statement in the notice of assignment of claims that “the transferee (Plaintiff) delegated the authority of the transferor (Defendant D) and issued this notice in accordance with Article 450 of the Civil Act.”

C. On July 25, 2016, the Plaintiff notified G of the assignment of claims in its own name by re-certified mail of content-proof as of August 25, 2016, along with the power of attorney as of July 25, 2016 under Defendant D’s name. The notification of the assignment of claims reached G on August 26, 2016.

Defendant C (hereinafter “Defendant C”) received the claim amounting to KRW 76,50,180, such as promissory notes against Defendant D, as the claim amount. Of the claim for the purchase of goods against Defendant D, the amount up to the claim amount, the Defendant C’s claim amounting to the above claim amount, which was issued on August 18, 2016, Cheongju District Court Decision 2016TBE 5752, and the original copy was served on G on August 23, 2016.

E. Defendant B Co., Ltd (hereinafter “Defendant B”) received KRW 550,00,00 from Defendant D’s claim for the price of goods against G, and Defendant D notified that the said claim was transferred to G by content-certified mail on August 22, 2016, and that notification reached G on August 23, 2016.

F. On October 14, 2016, G deposited KRW 482,552,780 (hereinafter “instant deposit”) as indicated in the purport of the claim, on the grounds that the assignment of claims and the provisional seizure of claims, the seizure of claims, and the collection order concurrently conflict with the assignment of claims and the collection order, and the genuine creditor cannot be identified, pursuant to Article 487 of the Civil Act and Article 248(1) of the Civil Execution Act, G deposited KRW 482,552,780, as indicated in the purport of the claim.

2. The creditor.