1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The case shall be transferred to the Seoul Central District Court.

purport, purport, and.

1. The facts under the basis of the facts are either a dispute between the parties or a significant fact to the court.

(1) The defendant shall be a non-capital special corporation established to cope with situations in which insured financial institutions paying deposit insurance premiums to the defendant pursuant to the Depositor Protection Act are unable to pay deposits, etc. due to bankruptcy, etc. and to protect depositors

② The Plaintiff purchased subordinated bonds issued by the Defendant’s insured financial institution, the Gyeonggi Savings Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Game Savings Bank”), and was declared bankrupt by the Seoul Central District Court on July 1, 2013.

③ The Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendant for insurance money equivalent to the principal and interest of purchase bonds, which the Plaintiff was unable to receive pursuant to Article 31 of the Depositor Protection Act, on the ground that the Plaintiff’s declaration of bankruptcy against the Gyeonggi Savings Bank constitutes insurance accidents under Article 2 subparag. 7 of the Depositor Protection Act, and subordinate bonds purchased from the Gyeonggi Savings Bank constitutes “deposits, etc.” under Article 2 subparag. 2 (e) of the Depositor Protection Act.

④ The Defendant did not pay insurance money on the ground that the lower-ranking claim that the Plaintiff purchased is not a “deposit, etc.” subject to the Depositor Protection Act.

⑤ On September 25, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant on September 25, 2013 against the court of first instance for the performance of the obligation to pay insurance money (hereinafter “instant lawsuit”) seeking the payment of the amount stated in the claim as the principal and interest of the insurance money under the Depositor Protection Act, and confirmed that the Defendant’s refusal of the obligation under Articles 31 and 32 of the Depositor Protection Act violated the legal duty to act.

“A request for amendment to the purport of the claim was made to add the content.

(Then, the plaintiff withdrawn the lawsuit as added by this court). 2. The measure of this court is ①.