1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasons why this court should explain is "1. Basic Facts" of the judgment of the court of first instance.

The phrase “paragraph B” is as follows, and the phrase “1. Basic Facts” added “A” to the phrase “(based on recognition)”, and the Defendant’s argument added in the trial is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for the addition of the judgment on the Defendant’s assertion added in the trial as set forth in paragraph (2) below, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

“C. B” On September 13, 2013, a notice of assignment of claims, stating the assignment of claims of this case, to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant notice”).

G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “G”) using the same office as the Defendant.

A) Around 11:42 on September 16, 2013, E, an employee of E, received the instant notice and then sent it to the Defendant at that time. D. The Defendant transferred KRW 254,375,000 and KRW 8,800,000 to one bank account under B on September 16, 2013. (e) G and the Defendant are the same location of the head office, and H representative director H, in-house director I, and auditor J are the Defendant’s representative director or internal director.”

2. Judgment on the defendant's argument added in the trial

A. The Defendant’s assertion 1) B and the Defendant agreed to pay the material cost and personnel expenses, out of the service cost under the instant service contract, to the Defendant directly to the human resources supplier and material company. As such, B cannot claim the amount equivalent to the material cost and personnel expenses out of the service cost under the instant service contract, and the Plaintiff is also the same as the Plaintiff who received the service cost claim from B. 2) Since E received the instant notice is not the Defendant’s employee but G, the instant notice cannot be deemed to have arrived to the Defendant solely on the ground that E received it. On the other hand, E sent the instant notice to the Defendant.

Even if there is no authority to notify the assignment of claims to E, it shall be deemed a legitimate notification of assignment of claims.