1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. Basic facts 1) The Plaintiff is a company engaging in general wholesale and retail business. The Defendant is a personal entrepreneur engaged in manufacturing business of working clothes, military clothes, etc., and wholesale and retail business, etc., under the trade name of “C”. Meanwhile, C has completed business registration under the name of the Defendant’s spouse, but the Defendant actually operates it. However, C was determined as the successful bidder of the “E Contract” ordered by the purchasing business entity of the Public Procurement Service, and on March 21, 2016, concluded a commodity contract with the Public Procurement Service to sell clothing, etc. at KRW 653,215,360 (hereinafter “instant commodity contract”).

3) On March 11, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the supply of goods equivalent to KRW 653,215,360 to C, and C, on March 23, 2016, between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff on March 23, 2016, to transfer to the Plaintiff the claim for the price of goods at KRW 653,215,360 based on the instant goods contract (hereinafter “instant contract for the transfer of claims”).

(4) On March 23, 2016, C and the Plaintiff filed an application for approval of the transfer of the instant claim with the Public Procurement Service, but the Public Procurement Service rejected it to the effect that it would directly obtain approval from each branch of the Korea Railroad Corporation.

5) Since the delivery of the instant goods to the Korea Railroad Corporation, C is from June 16, 2016 to July 20, 2016 to Daejeon Government Procurement Service to KRW 653,215,360 (hereinafter “the instant goods price”).

(6) The Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months and three years of suspended execution, for the following reasons: (a) the Defendant was found guilty of embezzlement by arbitrarily using the price of the instant goods kept in custody for the Plaintiff.

The appeal is currently pending (Seoul High Court 2019No144, Seoul High Court 2019No144, Dec. 14, 2018) by appeal of both the defendant and the prosecutor against the above judgment of the Seoul Central District Court 2017Da1220, 1315 (Joint).

hereinafter referred to as “related criminal case”.