Seeking confirmation of the right to claim the return of deposited goods against a third party who is not the person to whom the deposit is made, there is no benefit of confirmation.

In addition to seeking confirmation of the right to claim the return of deposit against the deposited parties, it cannot be said that there is no benefit to seek confirmation of the right to claim the return of deposit against the Defendants who are merely the seizure authority for the right to claim the return of deposit.

§ 487. Condition and effect of deposit for performance under the Civil Code

Confirmation of Claim for Payment of Deposit

AA

Aaa and two others

The Company is in the position of the obligor against the Plaintiff and the transferor of the claim against DD;

According to Gap evidence No. 4, the plaintiff against the defendant company 2016th Seoul Eastern District Court

3786 To request a payment order and recognize that the payment order became final and conclusive on July 23, 2016, and the defendant's association

Corporation does not dispute the validity of the assignment of claims against the plaintiff and the depositor of the deposit of this case

Inasmuch as the Plaintiff does not constitute “A”, the Plaintiff sought confirmation against the Defendant Company of the claim for payment of deposit money.

have no interest in such transaction.

C. As to Defendant BB, Aaaa

bbb, Aaaa does not constitute the deposited parties of the instant deposit;

However, among the deposit money of this case, the seizure authority's right to claim for payment of deposit money of the defendant company is too low.

D. The Plaintiff seeks confirmation of the right to claim the payment of deposit against the deposited parties.

In addition, there is no benefit to seek confirmation of the above Defendants’ claim for payment.

3. Conclusion

The plaintiff's lawsuit of this case is dismissed because there is no interest in confirmation, and it is so ordered as per Disposition.

partnership.

1) On November 14, 2012, it was added through correction of the person under deposit.

October 30, 2018

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

The defendant of the Gu office's branch defendant confirmed that the plaintiff had the source of the claim for deposit payment against the x members out of the xx members deposited by the non-party Ddd Co., Ltd. in Seoul East District Court No. 2012 Deposit No. 4518. 2012.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 4, 2012, Defendant CC Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) transferred xx won to the Plaintiff on October 4, 2012 for the repayment of the goods payment obligation to the Plaintiff, and notified the Plaintiff of the transfer of dddd on or around October 8, 2012. B. Dd on November 1, 2012, Defendant CC Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) deposited ee, fggggggggg (provisional attachment), hhh (assign), 3 (Assign), jj (assign), kk (assign) and k1), 248(1), 248(1) of the Civil Execution Act, and 248(1) of the Civil Execution Act (as Seoul Special Metropolitan City Co., Ltd., Ltd.’s deposit and registration license tax (as Seoul Special Metropolitan City Co. 21, 2012).

D. On September 6, 2013, Defendant Aa attached the amount up to the delinquent amount of national taxes (total corporate tax, income tax, etc. xx) among the Defendant Company’s right to claim the withdrawal of deposits, and notified the fact of seizure on September 11, 2013.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the legitimacy of a lawsuit

A. A. The legal action for confirmation requires the benefit of confirmation as a requirement for the protection of rights, and the benefit of confirmation is recognized when a judgment for confirmation is rendered is the most effective and appropriate means to eliminate the Plaintiff’s rights or legal status in a position. The lawsuit for confirmation does not necessarily have to be limited to a legal relationship between the original and the Defendant, but can also be subject to the legal relationship between the original and the Defendant and a third party or between third parties. However, in order to eliminate the risks or apprehensions caused by the Plaintiff’s rights or legal status, it is necessary to immediately determine the legal relationship by a judgment for confirmation between the original and the Defendant, and the benefit of confirmation is the most effective and appropriate means.

B. As to the Defendant Company