A seizure based on a tax claim may not oppose the third party who has acquired the claim before the seizure.

If a seizure based on a tax claim has been effected on the same claim after the debtor's claim against a third party is transferred to a third party and the notification of transfer with a fixed date has been made, it is merely an attachment of a claim that has already been reverted to a third party, and thus, cannot be asserted against the third party who has acquired the claim based on a

Article 450 of the Civil Act

2012 Gohap 3314 Verification of Claim for Payment of Deposit

AA Savings Bank's lawsuit taking over the lawsuit

KoreaFFF outside two others, Inc.

July 27, 2012

August 31, 2012

1. From November 18, 201, between the Plaintiff and the Defendants, it is confirmed that the Plaintiff had the right to claim payment of deposit money of KRW 000 out of KRW 000 deposited by the Jung Heavy Industries Co., Ltd. under the Geumyang District Court Decision 3808 in 201.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims against the defendants are dismissed.

3. Of the costs of lawsuit, 4/5 shall be borne by the Defendants, and the remainder by the Plaintiff.

BB In November 18, 201, it is confirmed that the Plaintiff has the right to claim the withdrawal from the Central District Court in 1,324,619,989, deposited in gold No. 3808 of 201.

1. Basic facts

(a) Conclusion of credit transaction agreements and assignment of claims;

1) On September 15, 2010, AA Savings Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “A Savings Bank”) concluded three credit transaction agreements with Defendant LaborCC, KimD, and LaborE, including:

2) On September 15, 2010, Defendant Nowon-gu transferred the following bonds (hereinafter referred to as “instant bonds”) against Defendant Nowon-CC’s Heavy Industries Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “B Heavy Industries”) to secure the obligation owed by E to AAB Savings Bank in accordance with the above credit transaction agreement, and on the same day, a notary public notified BB industry of the said transfer by way of content-certified mail with the fixed date from the Chuncheon Joint Law Office, and the two industries received the above content-certified mail around that day.

3) As of July 20, 201, the Plaintiff, as of July 20, 201, owns each claim for the principal and interest of KRW 000 and interest of KRW 000,000, total of KRW 000, total of KRW 000, total of KRW 000, total of the principal and interest of KRW 000, total of KRW 000, total of KRW 000, total of the principal and interest of KRW 000, total of KRW

(b) Deposit of the BB industry;

1) At the time of November 18, 201, BB industry bears 000 won for the payment of construction equipment rent (hereinafter referred to as "the instant claim") to Defendant NowonCC as of November 18, 201, and ① on September 15, 2010, the notice of assignment of the instant claim to the transferee of the claim at AAB Savings Bank as of September 15, 201, and ② the notice of attachment of the claim on August 9, 201, the execution bond amount of which was KRW 00,000, and ③ the credit transferee as of October 11, 201, and the credit transfer amount was sent to Defendant Korea FFFFF (hereinafter referred to as "Korea FFFFFF"), and the deposit of the instant case was made by the District Court under Article 487 (1) 208 of the Civil Execution Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Korea FFFFFFFFFFFFFF," and Defendant 10818 (308) of the Civil Execution Act.

2) On March 5, 2012, at the time of the instant deposit, BB industry additionally bears 000 won of the construction equipment rent for Defendant Nowon-CC as of March 5, 201, and upon which, in addition to the notice of assignment of each assignment of claims, and the notice of assignment of claims attachment as of December 28, 201, the notification of assignment of claims was additionally served on the Defendant’s Republic of Korea (Yanananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananannanannannannan) with the amount of KRW 00 of the enforcement bond amount as of December 28, 2011, entered the notification of assignment of claims in accordance with Article 487 of the Civil Act, Article 248(1) of the Civil Execution Act, and Article 248(1) of the Civil Execution Act, deposit the respondent with Defendant Norway, and Defendant FFF and AFF Bank.

(c) Bankruptcy of AA Savings Bank;

AA Savings Bank was declared bankrupt on March 27, 2012 by the Chuncheon District Court 2012Hahap1, and the plaintiff was appointed as bankruptcy trustee on the same day.

D. Receipt, etc. of secondary deposit money by the Plaintiff

1) In addition to the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendants claiming confirmation of the claim for payment of the second deposit and was sentenced to the Seoul Central District Court 20127rhap21855 on June 15, 2012, and the said judgment became final and conclusive as it is.

2) The Plaintiff received on July 20, 2012 the total sum of KRW 000 and interest KRW 000 on the second deposit and interest thereon, according to the above judgment.

[Recognizing Facts] Defendant LaborCC and KoreaFFF: Pursuant to Article 150(3) of the Civil Procedure Act, each confession is made, and Defendant Republic of Korea: the non-contentious facts, Gap evidence 1 to 11, and Eul evidence 1 and 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion

As long as Defendant TradeCC transferred the instant claim to the Plaintiff, it did not have the right to pay the instant deposit, and Defendant KoreaFFFF cannot oppose the Plaintiff as long as it acquired the instant claim from Defendant TradeCC after the notification of the assignment of the instant claim, and as long as the attachment based on the Defendant’s tax claims was made after the notification of the assignment of the instant claim, the Defendant Republic of Korea cannot oppose the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff has the right to pay the instant deposit.

B. Defendant Republic of Korea’s assertion

1) According to Article 35 of the Framework Act on National Taxes, national taxes are to be collected in preference to other public charges or other claims, and the claims of Defendant Republic of Korea are priority over the claims of the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff’s claims are without merit

2) As the Plaintiff received the second deposit (including interest), it is deemed that the Plaintiff’s claim for the principal and interest of loan against KimD and LaborE was extinguished as much as the amount, and therefore, the Plaintiff’s right to the instant deposit should be limited to the extent that the amount calculated by deducting the second deposit (including interest) already received from the principal and interest of loan against KimD and LaborE.

3. Determination

A. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

In order to secure the principal and interest of the Plaintiff, Defendant Norway transferred the instant claim to the Plaintiff for BB Industries, which is future credit, and notified BB Industries with a fixed date, and BB industry deposited the instant credit amount upon delivery of the notification of assignment of the Plaintiff’s credit, and notification of the attachment by the Defendant Republic of Korea, etc. The Plaintiff’s right to the instant deposit does not exceed the total amount of the principal and interest of the Plaintiff and Trade Union. In this case, as of July 20, 2012, the Plaintiff used the principal and interest of KRW 00 and the total amount of the principal and interest of KRW 200,000, total of KRW 200,000, and KRW 200,000, and KRW 20,000,000, and KRW 20,000,000,000, and KRW 20,000,000,000,000, respectively, and KRW 70,000,00.

Therefore, the Plaintiff as of the date of closing argument of this case among the Plaintiff and the Defendants

It is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff has the right to claim for payment of deposit money equivalent to the sum of the principal and interest of loan for KimD and NoE (=(000 wonx2) + (00 wonx2)).

B. Determination on Defendant Republic of Korea’s assertion

Article 35 (1) 3 of the Framework Act on National Taxes provides that "it shall not apply to claims secured by the right to lease on a deposit basis, a pledge right, or a mortgage, where national taxes or additional dues (excluding national taxes and additional dues imposed on the property) are collected from the proceeds of sale of the property for which the fact that the establishment of a right to lease on a deposit basis, a pledge right, or a mortgage has been registered prior to the statutory due date is proved, as prescribed by Presidential Decree." This case applies to cases where a seizure is made based on a tax claim on the real property for which a real right is established which requires the public notice, the priority order of a security right and a tax claim is determined. Thus, if a debtor's claim against a third party is seized based on a tax claim after the transfer to a third party and the notification of a transfer with a fixed date is made based on the tax claim of the Republic of Korea, unless there are circumstances such as cancellation or invalidation of the above assignment, it is nothing more than that it is reasonable to see that it is against the plaintiff's future notification of the transfer of a tax claim of this case.

C. Sub-committee

Among the Plaintiff and the Defendants, the right to claim a deposit of KRW 000 out of the instant deposit money shall be deemed to be the Plaintiff.

4. Conclusion

If so, the plaintiff's claim shall be accepted within the extent of the above recognition, and the claim shall be made.

Therefore, this is dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition.