1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Facts of recognition

On November 29, 2011, the Promotion Savings Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "Promotion Savings Bank") (hereinafter referred to as the "Promotion Savings Bank") transferred the secured loan claims (hereinafter referred to as the "bonds of this case") equivalent to KRW 6.481 million to the Defendant in total amount to KRW 5,323,307,059 in the amount of money, and entered into a contract for the transfer and takeover of bonds as shown in the attached Table 2.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant transfer contract”). On April 15, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a petition for bankruptcy of the Promotion Savings Bank (Seoul Central District Court 2013Hahap64), and on May 20, 2014, the Plaintiff was appointed as the bankruptcy trustee.

On July 3, 2013, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the redemption of bonds that the Plaintiff requested the return of KRW 2,430,738,569 of the settlement amount, along with the cancellation of the instant transfer contract, pursuant to Article 22 of the instant transfer contract, on the grounds of the petition for bankruptcy of the Promotion Savings Bank.

(2) On June 7, 2012, the Defendant received KRW 3,122,10,370, and KRW 49,523,364 from the distribution procedure (U.S. branch court 203,523,364, and ③ on March 17, 2014, the Defendant received the auction procedure (Seoul Central District Court 3,122,10,370, and KRW 304,000, and KRW 70,000,000, and KRW 301,00,000,000, and KRW 301,000,00,000,000,000,000,000,000 won and KRW 231,00,00,000,000,000,00 won and KRW 3231,00,00.

The Defendant paid KRW 566,004,242 to the Plaintiff on April 8, 2014, based on the result of the ex post facto settlement, after reflecting the dividend in accordance with Article 8 of the instant transfer contract.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 9 (including additional numbers), each entry, and Article 22 of the Assignment Contract of this case asserted the purport of the whole pleadings is automatically rescinded without going through separate procedures for rescission of contract.