1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On August 29, 2007, the Korea-to-Land Industry Development Corporation (hereinafter “Korea-to-Land Industry Development”) that had been awarded a contract for specialized management services for the housing reconstruction improvement project by the E Housing Reconstruction Project Association (hereinafter “instant association”) transferred KRW 2 billion out of the service cost bonds to the Defendant and notified the instant association of the transfer of the claim.

B. On February 4, 2015, the Plaintiffs received a collection order for the seizure and collection of claims (No. 2014TT 4751) regarding KRW 409,671,697, respectively, among the claims for service charges against the instant association of the Korea Land and Industry Development, and the said order was served on February 11, 2015 on the instant association.

C. On May 15, 2015, the instant association deposited the service charges (hereinafter “the instant deposit”) by designating the deposited person as “the Korea Land Industry Development or the Defendant,” after settling the service charges to be paid for the development of the Korea Land Industry at KRW 1,417,184,798.

On June 17, 2015, the distribution schedule was prepared to distribute to the Defendant all KRW 1,418,220,025, which deducts the execution cost from the total sum of the principal and interest of the deposited principal. D.

The Plaintiffs raised an objection to KRW 409,671,697 among the above dividends on June 17, 2014, and filed the instant lawsuit on June 24, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs' assertion and judgment are invalid by an agreement on the assignment of claims against the instant association of Korea-China Industry Development in collusion with the defendant, and thus, it is so argued that 409,671,697 won, which the plaintiffs received each seizure and collection order against the defendant among the dividend amount against the defendant, should be distributed to the plaintiffs.

The burden of proving that the development of the Hantop Industry and the assignment of claims by the defendant are invalid as a result of a false representation in collusion is against the plaintiffs.