1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 2,969,903 as well as its full payment from August 26, 2017.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 22, 2016, C leased the lease deposit amount of KRW 60,000,000 from the Defendant, and the period from October 22, 2016 to October 22, 2018.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). B.

On October 24, 2016, the Plaintiff acquired KRW 20,000,000 out of KRW 60,000,000 under the instant lease agreement to secure the interest rate of KRW 27.90 (the interest rate is the same as the annual interest rate) and the due date of repayment on October 22, 2018 (hereinafter “instant lease”).

(hereinafter “transfer of claim of this case”) C.

The Plaintiff, at the time of the instant assignment of claims, delegated the F with the authority to notify the assignment of claims by C, and accordingly, sent the content-certified mail notifying the Defendant of the said assignment on July 27, 2017, and delivered the said notification to the Defendant on July 27, 2017.

On April 19, 2018, the Defendant sold the above Do lending E and H, and around that time, returned to C the full amount of KRW 60,000,000 under the instant lease agreement.

E. Meanwhile, on September 21, 2017, C filed an application for individual rehabilitation with Suwon District Court 2017da71516, and rendered a decision to commence individual rehabilitation on April 26, 2018.

(However, the above individual rehabilitation procedure was abolished on October 19, 2018). 【The ground for recognition has no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 9, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, since the lease contract of this case was terminated, the defendant is obligated to pay the amount equivalent to the principal and interest of the secured debt out of the lease deposit to the plaintiff, the transferee of the transfer of this case, unless there are special

B. The Defendant decided the Defendant’s assertion (i.e., the Defendant, at the time of the instant lease agreement with C, prohibited the transfer of the right to refund the lease deposit or the provision of security, and the Plaintiff.