1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant borrowed KRW 7,00,000 from C, and delivered documents, such as the Plaintiff’s certificate of loan and the certificate of transfer of a vehicle in which the Plaintiff had the official seal and the transferee column. On May 16, 2013, the Plaintiff leased KRW 13,50,000 in aggregate to D on May 16, 2013, and acquired the Defendant’s claim against the Defendant by obtaining the above loan certificate, etc. The Defendant agreed to the transfer of the claim against C by delivering documents, such as the obligee’s certificate of loan and the certificate of transfer of a vehicle in which the assignee is the official seal and the transferee column. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 7,00,000 to the Plaintiff who is the transferee of the claim. 2) The Defendant is not obligated to borrow money with

If a person who lends money with his own vehicle as collateral fails to pay the money regardless of who is to do so, the defendant shall prepare a blank loan certificate, etc. to deliver the vehicle and grant the person who lends money through C a blank loan certificate, etc., and finally, the plaintiff who finally acquired the vehicle with a security may claim the return of the loan to the defendant as the final creditor

B. The defendant's assertion is less than 7,000,000 won by taking a vehicle from C as security, but there is no difference in borrowing money from the plaintiff, and thus the plaintiff cannot respond to the claim of this case.

2. Determination

A. The assignment of nominative claim with respect to a claim for takeover amount cannot be set up against the obligor, etc. unless the transferor notifies the obligor or does not consent to the obligor (Article 450(1) of the Civil Act), and the assignee who fails to meet the requirements for setting up against the obligor, cannot set up a claim for transfer amount against the obligor, since there

On the other hand, prior approval of the transfer of claims prior to the transfer of claims is a result of having the debtor in an unstable state where the time of the transfer cannot be determined, and thus, it cannot be permitted in principle.

Supreme Court Decision 2009Da90740 Decided February 11, 2010