1. The plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) adding "the results of fact inquiry about MM in the court of the first instance" to "the purport of the entire pleadings" in Chapter 3 of the judgment of the court of the first instance; and (b) adding "the results of fact inquiry about MM in the court of the first instance" to "the fourth 16th conclusion"; and (c) adding "the fourth 16th st th th 16th th th th th th th th

2. Additional determination

C. Determination 1 on the plaintiffs' assertion that the repayment deposit of this case is null and void 1) since the defendant's notification of seizure has first reached the third debtor debtor prior to arrival of the notification of the assignment of claims by the plaintiffs, it is obvious that the above arrival has reached each time. In this case, the repayment deposit and the execution deposit should not be made on the ground of creditor's uncertainty, but the combined payment deposit and the execution deposit should be made. However, since the payment deposit was made without a mixed deposit and the execution deposit was made without a mixed deposit, if the execution procedure was performed upon the mixed deposit, the opportunity of the plaintiffs to receive the payment in priority as the payment creditor was lost. Accordingly, the repayment deposit of this case made by the third debtor is null and void, and the defendant's right to claim the payment of this case has no right to claim the payment of this case. 2) First of all, considering the above claims of the plaintiffs together with the above claims, the plaintiffs' claim to claim the payment of this case's deposit is invalid for 39 years and 39 years of the final claim for payment of this case.

Next, the deposit for repayment of the instant deposit is made.