1. 122,695,335 won, which was deposited by the Suwon District Court as the Geumwon District Court Geum 1775 in 2017;

Facts of recognition

A. On March 30, 2017, Defendant B-M Korea Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant B-M”) transferred to the Plaintiff the claim amounting to KRW 122,695,335 (hereinafter “instant claim”) which Defendant B-M transferred to the Plaintiff, and Defendant B-M transferred to the Plaintiff the claim amounting to KRW 122,695,335 (hereinafter “instant claim”).

On April 4, 2017, the Plaintiff sent a notice of assignment of claims to the instant assignment of claims by content-certified mail, and on April 5, 2017, the said notice of assignment of claims arrived at the examination.

(hereinafter “Notification of Assignment of Claim”). (b)

On the other hand, Defendant B transferred the instant bonds to the transferee of the corresponding bonds as listed below, and each of the notice of assignment of claims reaches the office test on the date of notification specified below.

On April 3, 2017, Defendant 1, the date of notification of the assignee of the claim, and Defendant 2, the date of notification of the assignment of claim, as of April 28, 2017, did not have a fixed date.

In addition, the creditors of the defendant B-M have seized or collected the claims of this case as stated below, and the provisional attachment decision or the seizure collection order was served on the service test on the date of service specified below.

On April 24, 2017, the delivery date of the amount of claims for preservative measures by creditors 1, B, and collection KRW 100 million, KRW 4,00,000,000,000,000 for Defendant C’s provisional attachment No. 3,55,415,00 KRW 56,155,00 on May 30, 2017, Defendant C’s provisional attachment No. 56,15, and KRW 415,00 on June 4, 2017.

B. On June 2017, 2017, the KCA deposited KRW 122,695,335 of the instant claim on the ground that the instant claim was notified of the assignment of claims, provisional attachment, or the collection of seizure, as seen above, and that the instant claim was subject to the foregoing notification, provisional attachment, or collection.

(hereinafter “Deposit of this case”).

A. As to Defendant KST Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant K”), there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4.