1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The defendant's ground of appeal citing the judgment of the court of first instance is not significantly different from the argument in the court of first instance, and the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance are justified even if the evidence submitted in the court of first instance is re

Therefore, the reasoning for the court’s explanation on the instant case is as follows, except for adding the following judgments to the argument emphasized by the Defendant in this court, and therefore, it is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance. Therefore, it is acceptable to accept the argument as it is in accordance with the main sentence of

2. Additional determination

A. Since C’s claim for return of unjust enrichment against the Plaintiff, which is a passive claim, had already been transferred to the Defendant before the Defendant expressed his/her intent of offset, and the obligee has changed, both claims cannot be offset against each other as they are not in the offset.

B. Determination 1) In a case where the transferor of a claim gives notice of transfer or there was a cause for offset which could have already been set at the time when the obligor gives his/her consent, the obligor may set up a set-off against the assignee if the maturity period of the automatic claim comes earlier or simultaneously comes earlier than that of the passive claim (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Da45521, Feb. 16, 2012). 2) According to each of the evidence 3-1 and 2-2, “A”, which is prior to the Plaintiff’s declaration of set-off, transfers the foregoing claim for return of unjust enrichment to the Defendant on February 1, 2018, which is the passive claim prior to the Plaintiff’s declaration of set-off, and the fact that C notified the Plaintiff of the said assignment of claim and served it around that time

However, in full view of the purport of evidence No. 1 and evidence No. 7-1 and No. 7-2, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against C and F for damages (No. 201Gahap7828, Gwangju High Court No. 2016Na1747, Jan. 31, 2018), and the appellate court shall pay damages to the Plaintiff KRW 914,930,741, as well as KRW 5% per annum from Apr. 11, 2015 to Jan. 31, 2018, and the next day.