beta
Text
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. Regarding ground of appeal No. 1
A. If the assignee fails to meet the requirements for setting up against the obligor such as notification by the transferor or consent by the obligor even though he/she acquired the claim, he/she is not entitled to exercise any right against the obligor because there is no legal relationship between the obligor and the assignee (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 90Da9452, 9469, Aug. 18, 1992). The transferor may either notify the obligor of the assignment of the claim or claim the obligor’s transfer of the claim with the obligor
(See Supreme Court Decision 90Meu27662 Decided November 27, 1990. Accordingly, in a case where the assignee of a claim claims that he/she is a successor in the proceeding and files an application for intervention, whether succession to the status as a creditor was made during the proceeding is determined as of the time when the requirements for counterclaim are met, rather than at the time when the agreement on the transfer of claim was reached (see Supreme Court Decision 2016Da8589, May 16, 2019). Whether the assignee of a claim constitutes a successor after the closing of argument that has the effect of the final and conclusive judgment pursuant to Article 218(1) of the Civil Procedure Act ought to be determined based on not only when the agreement on the transfer of claim was reached, but also when the requirements
B. The lower court determined that, on the grounds that it is reasonable to view that the position of the transferor of credit as a creditor is succeeded to the transferee of credit after meeting the requisite for counterclaim, the res judicata effect of the final and conclusive judgment in the prior investment repayment lawsuit filed by E (hereinafter “E”) a transferor of credit shall also extend to the Plaintiff who satisfies the requisite for counterclaim with the Defendant, the debtor, after the closing of argument in the lawsuit above.
C. Examining the above legal principles in light of the above, the above determination by the court below is just, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the subjective scope of res judicata is applied.