The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The obligee’s claim for the repayment of an obligation is a natural exercise of the obligee’s right, and this does not interfere with the obligee’s exercise of the obligation on the ground that there exist other creditors, and the obligor cannot refuse the performance of the obligation on the ground that there are other creditors. Thus, even if the obligor prepared a notarial deed to the effect that a promissory note is issued for the payment of an existing obligation and a compulsory execution on the obligation of a promissory note is accepted, barring any special circumstance to deem that such an act does not lead to a fraudulent act detrimental to other

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Da103376 Decided December 22, 2011, etc.). In addition, even if an assignment order for a seized monetary claim became final and conclusive lawfully in the course of the procedure, the assignment order becomes null and void unless an assignment order is served on a third debtor, and thus, the assignment order becomes null and void unless an assignment order exists when the assignment order is served on the third debtor. As such, the effect of extinction upon the transfer of the seized monetary claim to the entire creditor or upon the repayment

(2) On April 12, 2007, the lower court: (a) based on adopted evidence; (b) the Plaintiff is a creditor against B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”); and (c) Samsung F&M Ltd. (hereinafter “T”) held the commodity price claim amounting to KRW 1,367,245,00 (hereinafter “instant commodity price claim”); and (c) B received demand from the Defendants on September 26, 201 for the repayment of the human resources price obligation delayed from the Defendants; and (d) Defendant A received demand for the repayment of the human resources price obligation delayed from the Defendants; and (e) Defendant A issued each promissory note amounting to KRW 37,400,000 at face value and KRW 34,000,000 at face value and KRW 34,000,000 at face value (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) to each of the said Defendants on the same day.