The set-off of the garnishee ordered to seize the claim;

A garnishee in receipt of an order of provisional seizure against a claim may not set up a defense against the creditor of provisional seizure by set-off which has been acquired thereafter, but where the automatic claim and the passive claim are set-off at the time of provisional seizure against the claim, or where the automatic claim are set-off at the time of provisional seizure against the claim, or where the maturity of the automatic claim comes simultaneously with or prior to that of the passive claim, the garnishee may set

Articles 492 and 498 of the Civil Act

Supreme Court Decision 87Meu472 Decided February 23, 1988

[Judgment of the court below]

Han Jong Bank, Inc., Counsel for the defendant-appellee and one other

Seoul High Court Decision 88Na11386 delivered on September 5, 198

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below held that the plaintiff's assertion, i.e., the fact that the plaintiff is the deposit owner of a separate deposit at the time of original sale, there is no evidence to acknowledge it, and the court below's decision is just and there is no violation of the rules of evidence

2. On May 30, 1986, the court below found that the plaintiff received a provisional seizure order of 29,000,000 won against the non-party Hongjin Co., Ltd.'s separate deposit claims on June 16 of the same year, and applied for an assignment order of the above separate deposit claims which were already seized on Oct. 24, 1987, and the order was issued by the court on Oct. 30, 1987, and it was delivered to the defendant bank, which was the third debtor on Oct. 30, 1987. The defendant bank did not err in the law of 20,000,000 won as of Nov. 19, 198, and lent the above separate deposit claims to the non-party Co., Ltd. as of Nov. 16, 198; the non-party Co., Ltd.'s repayment period of 10,000,000 won as of Dec. 16, 1986.

3. A garnishee subject to the order of provisional seizure against a claim cannot set up against the creditor of provisional seizure by set-off which is subsequently acquired (Article 498 of the Civil Code). However, in case where the automatic claim and the passive claim are set-off at the time of provisional seizure against a claim, or where the period of repayment of the automatic claim comes simultaneously with or prior to that of the passive claim at the time of provisional seizure, the garnishee may set-off against the creditor of provisional seizure by set-off against the automatic claim (Article 87Da472 delivered on February 23, 198).

In the same purport, the court below's decision that the defendant may oppose the plaintiff, who is the provisional attachment obligee of the non-party company's claim for repayment of short-term deposit against the defendant by offsetting the non-party company's claim for repayment of loan against the non-party company. There is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as

4. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Song Man-man (Presiding Justice)