1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

Judgment of the first instance.

1. The reasoning of this court's explanation is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for an additional determination under paragraph (2). Thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. The plaintiff asserts that "the sales contract of this case was terminated upon the defendant's declaration of intention to cancel the contract with respect to New Frest on July 14, 2003," and that since the sales contract of this case was terminated on July 14, 2003, the defendant should return the down payment amount of KRW 24 million to the plaintiff, the whole right holder, as the restoration of the down payment following the cancellation of the sales contract.

On the other hand, the defendant asserts that the assignment order of this case is null and void, since the assignment order of this case is specified as "the restoration claim due to the cancellation of contract on July 6, 2007", so long as the termination of contract is not recognized on July 6, 2007, the assignment order of this case is null and void.

B. (1) In principle, the content of a claim to be seized and assigned in a claim attachment and assignment order is determined in accordance with the interpretation of the language and text stated in the “indicating the claim to be seized and assigned,” as indicated in the attachment and assignment order, and the third obligor is obligated to perform the duty stipulated in the attachment and assignment order as it is incorporated into a legal dispute between others by another person. Therefore, it is necessary to protect the third obligor so that it does not have an excessive burden when grasping the scope of the claim to be seized and assigned.

Therefore, the phrase "an indication of claims to be attached and entirely attached" should be objectively interpreted in accordance with the content of the phrase itself, and if the meaning of the phrase is unclear, it is reasonable to impose any disadvantage resulting therefrom on the requesting creditor of the attachment and assignment order. Therefore, when the third debtor understand the phrase based on the social average with ordinary care.