1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Basic Facts

A. On March 7, 2016, C, the representative director of the Company B (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) transferred to the Plaintiff a claim for service payment amounting to KRW 57,038,243 (hereinafter “instant claim for service payment”) under the D Operational Entrustment Contract, June 1, 2015, which the Nonparty Company had against the Defendant. On the same day, C sent the notice of assignment of claim by content-certified mail to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant notice”).

B. On March 8, 2016, E, an employee of the Defendant, received the instant notice at the Defendant’s office.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including branch numbers if there are additional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, fact inquiry results against the head of Seoul Gwangjin-gu Post Office of this Court, the purport of the whole pleadings as a whole.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was summarized based on the legal brief submitted by the Plaintiff on January 20, 2017.

On March 7, 2016, Nonparty Company: F, F, on the same day, assigned to the Plaintiff the instant service payment claim held by Nonparty Company against the Defendant in sequence; however, the assignment of assignment certificate and its notification were written to the Plaintiff that the Plaintiff directly acquired the instant service payment claim from Nonparty Company.

Therefore, the defendant is obliged to pay the service price of this case and damages for delay to the plaintiff.

B. The Defendant’s assertion 1) F or non-party company transferred the instant lawsuit to the Plaintiff for the principal purpose of having the Plaintiff conduct litigation, and the instant lawsuit is unlawful as it constitutes a litigation trust. 2) The Plaintiff entered the consignee in the envelope of the instant notice into G instead of the Defendant, who is an employee, not the Defendant, and thus, the instant assignment of claims is unlawful as a notification of assignment of claims to the Defendant, on the ground that it sent the instant

3. By March 10, 2016, the Defendant paid service charges to the non-party company.