1. Upon the Plaintiff’s conjunctive claim added by this court, the Defendant paid KRW 500 million to the Plaintiff as well as the Plaintiff’s ancillary claim.

1. The relationship between the plaintiff's claim for transfer money and the creditor's subrogation claim added by this court;

A. In the first instance court against the Defendant, the Plaintiff claimed for the payment of KRW 500 million of the acquisition price as the assignee of the claim and the delay damages, but the Plaintiff maintained its purport of the claim in this court, and added the claim for the payment of KRW 500 million of the construction price based on the subcontract as of March 15, 2012 (hereinafter “the construction price in this case”) and the delay damages upon the exercise of the obligee’s subrogation right to the cause of the claim.

B. However, the original claim for the transfer money was caused by the Plaintiff’s acquisition of the claim for the construction payment of this case against the Defendant from C [F Co., Ltd. (F) at the time of entering into the said subcontract with the Defendant, and at the present time, from G Co., Ltd. (G) (G Co., Ltd.; hereinafter “C for convenience”). The additional claim for creditor subrogation by this court is premised on the premise that the claim for the construction payment of this case still remains in C without transferring it to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, since the above claim for the transfer money and the creditor subrogation claim cannot be accepted at the same time, it is reasonable to regard the original transfer money claim as the primary and preliminary relationship to be the primary claim.

C. Furthermore, whether the form of consolidation is a simple consolidation or a primary and preliminary consolidation is determined on the basis of the nature of the claim, not the intention of the parties. Thus, even if the Plaintiff claims each of the above claims in the instant case, which are the primary and preliminary relationship, in a simple form, this court should consider it as the primary and preliminary claim, and determine it in the order thereof.

On August 17, 2016, Supreme Court Decision 2015Du48570 Decided August 17, 2016 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Du48570). 2. [On the other hand, the Plaintiff submitted a written opinion of his/her legal office (No. A. 13) to the Republic of Korea, and the