Where a transfer contract is rescinded after the notice of assignment of claims, requirements for the transferor to oppose the debtor.

Where the transfer contract is cancelled after the notification of transfer of nominative claim has been made, if the transferor intends to oppose the original obligor again by reason of the cancellation, the transferee shall notify the obligor of the fact of such cancellation.

Article 452(2) of the Civil Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 et al. (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Park Do-young and 1 other, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Plaintiff

Defendant 1 and two others

Daejeon District Court Decision 91Na5967 delivered on February 17, 1993

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

Where the transfer contract is cancelled after the notification of transfer of nominative claim has been made, if the transferor intends to oppose the original obligor again by reason of the cancellation, the transferee must notify the obligor of the fact of such cancellation.

In comparison with the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, we examine the records and review the reasoning of the judgment. The court below comprehensively agreed that Defendant 1 shall complete the registration of transfer of ownership with respect to the land of this case to the plaintiff as a repayment of the contract price. On April 3, 1990, the plaintiff and the non-party agreed that the non-party shall take over the remaining construction works of the plaintiff and settle the above construction price, and instead, they shall take over the right to claim the registration of transfer of ownership. The plaintiff received part of the above construction price from the non-party on June of the same month and notified the non-party 1 of the transfer of the above right to the land of this case on June 12 of the same month. The plaintiff's assertion that the above non-party lawfully transferred the above non-party to the above non-party by delay in the payment of the contract price under the transfer agreement, even if the plaintiff notified the non-party that the transfer contract would be cancelled, it cannot be asserted against the above defendant 1, as long as it is not acknowledged that the non-party notified of the cancellation of the transfer agreement.

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

Justices Kim Sang-won (Presiding Justice)