beta
Text
1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.
Purport of claim and appeal
1.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On February 3, 2015, Plaintiff B opened an account with Defendant Bank (C; hereinafter “instant account”); KRW 3,045,000 on the same day; and KRW 43,00,000 on March 16, 2015, respectively.
B. On March 17, 2015, the Defendant sent the content-certified mail that contains the intent of offset against Plaintiff B to the Plaintiff, and on March 27, 2015, issued a loan transaction agreement with Plaintiff B (principal KRW 4,097,470, provisional payment KRW 214,690, and KRW 214,690, and KRW 25 million, interest, KRW 486,010, interim interest, KRW 14,023,850, and KRW hereinafter “instant Claim 2”) against the Plaintiff as an automatic bond, and disposed of all the Defendant’s deposit claims against the Plaintiff under the loan transaction agreement with the Plaintiff on March 20, 207.
C. Meanwhile, on October 31, 2014, Plaintiff B was declared bankrupt by the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2014Hadan293, and the decision to grant immunity became final and conclusive upon receipt of the decision to grant immunity under the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2014Ma2938 on October 31, 2014, and Plaintiff B did not include the instant claims 1 and 2 in the creditor list at the
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 9, 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. The parties' assertion
A. The plaintiffs asserted that the defendant's claim is based on the premise that the amount of KRW 43 million out of KRW 45,822,020, which the defendant voluntarily deposited from the account of this case, is the deposit for the lease on a deposit basis owned by the plaintiff, and the defendant should pay KRW 43,00,000 to the plaintiff A. Since the claims Nos. 1 and 2 of this case are bankruptcy claims and the plaintiff B was granted a decision on bankruptcy and immunity, the defendant asserted that the defendant should pay KRW 2,822,02 of the remaining deposit claims to the plaintiff B because it cannot offset the claims Nos. 1 and 2 of this case, which are exempted from liability, with automatic claims Nos. 1 and 2 of this case, and if it is not acknowledged that the amount of KRW 43,00,000 is owned by the plaintiff