1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

3. Article 3 of the judgment of the court of first instance

1. The reasoning of the court of first instance’s explanation concerning the instant case is as follows, except for a modification or an additional determination as to the contents asserted by the Plaintiff in this court, and thus, it is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance. Thus, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

2. Parts to be corrected;

A. The respective right holders column 11, 21, and 22 of title 6 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be amended to “Defendant Mtex” collectively. The respective right holders column in title 17, 7, 5, 11, 13, 15, 17, 20, 21, 9, 14, 9, 16, 16, 16, 11, 21, and 22 of title 6 of the judgment of first instance.

B. On the 7th page of the judgment of the court of first instance, the phrase “ July 30, 2015” as “ July 31, 2015” is amended.

3. Additional determination

A. 1) Determination of the misapprehension of the legal principle as to the assertion of transfer of claims 1) The notification of transfer in the alteration of the right to claims based on the gist of the plaintiff's assertion is merely a requisite for setting up against the plaintiff, and it is not an effective requirement. Therefore, the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2013Da5064314 (hereinafter

(B) At the time of the determination (as of June 25, 2014, claims transferred by Sung Jinz to E and flass Compact shall be returned immediately to Sung Jin, the debtor, regardless of the notification of the transfer.

Therefore, since the seizure and collection order regarding the right to claim the payment of the deposit of this case, which was made on October 28, 2014 after the Plaintiff, exists and is valid as the seized claim exists, the Plaintiff should receive the distribution in the procedure of distributing the dispute claim of this case.

Nevertheless, the first instance court determined that the Plaintiff’s claim for the payment of the deposit of this case was transferred to Sung Jinz as of December 5, 2014, when Defendant Korea Technology Finance Corporation received a notice of the purport that Defendant Korea Technology Finance Corporation transferred the right to claim the payment of the deposit of this case to Sung Jinz, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim for the payment of the deposit of this case was null and void. Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the assignment of claims.