1. On August 13, 2019, Q&C Co., Ltd. between the Plaintiff and the Defendants, the Busan District Court Branch Decision No. 1430, 2019.

1. Determination as to claims against the remaining Defendants other than Defendant C

A. Indication of Claim: The description of the corresponding part of the Grounds for Claim against the above Defendants is as stated in the attached Form.

(b) Judgment on deemed confession (Article 208 (3) 2 and Article 150 (3) of the Civil Procedure Act);

2. Determination as to the claim against Defendant C

A. Basic facts 1) Debtor A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “debtor Co., Ltd”).

A) Q Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “ Q”) around October 2018.

1,330,00 won (hereinafter referred to as “instant claim”) for the purchase-price of goods

(2) Around November 5, 2018, the obligor Company transferred the instant claim to Q Q of the obligor Company (hereinafter “instant assignment of claim”) to Defendant C (R). Around November 5, 2018, the obligor Company notified Q of the assignment of claim to Q and received the said notification at that time.

3) On April 16, 2019, the debtor company filed a petition for bankruptcy, and on May 17, 2019, the bankruptcy was declared against the debtor company (Seoul District Court 2019Hahap1007), and Q was appointed as the bankruptcy trustee of the debtor company (hereinafter the plaintiff was appointed as the bankruptcy trustee of the debtor company) on August 13, 2019, the amount of KRW 11,30,000 of the amount of the goods deposited by the plaintiff or the defendants as the principal deposit of the plaintiff or the defendants was KRW 1430 on August 13, 2019.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 and 2 evidence (including provisional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

B. The assignment of claims by the Plaintiff constitutes an act of an obligor under Article 391 subparag. 1 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, knowing that the assignment of claims by the Plaintiff constitutes an act of undermining the bankruptcy creditors, and thus, the Plaintiff is denied.

Since the assignment of the claim in this case was null and void due to the plaintiff's exercise of the avoidance power, the right to claim a payment of the deposit in this case is against the plaintiff.

C. The debtor, who is an act subject to avoidance under Article 391 Subparag. 1 of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act, knows that the debtor would compromise any bankruptcy creditor.