beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Plaintiff corresponding to the following additional payment order shall be revoked.
Reasons
1. The reasoning for this part of the basic facts is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Although the Plaintiff’s gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion C transferred E 1 and 2 points to the Defendant, it did not receive KRW 250,000,000 out of the transfer proceeds, and was holding a claim against the Defendant for the instant transfer proceeds. G lent KRW 20,000 to the Defendant on November 6, 2015, thereby holding a claim against the Defendant for the instant transfer proceeds. However, C and G transferred each of the instant transfer proceeds to the Plaintiff on December 15, 2016, and notified the Defendant of the assignment of the claim on the same day.
Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the sum of KRW 270,000,000 (=250,000,000 won) and damages for delay.
3. Determination
A. The reasoning for this part of the judgment on the claim for the transfer money of this case is as stated in Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance.
B. On November 6, 2015, G paid KRW 20,000 to the Defendant on November 6, 2015, the fact that G paid KRW 20,000 to the Defendant is without dispute between the parties. On December 15, 2016, G transferred the instant claim to the Plaintiff on the same day, and notified the Defendant of the assignment of the claim, and reached the Defendant at that time. As seen earlier, the fact that G transferred the claim to the Defendant on the same day is as seen earlier. 2) The following circumstances, namely, ① C and G, in fact with a marital relationship, acquired four branch offices of H “H” mark 1 and 2, including E1 and 2, and even if E1 and 2 are transferred to the Defendant, G appears to have jointly transferred the claim to the Defendant.