1. All claims filed by the plaintiff (appointed party) and the designated parties are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each person;

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs were the workers who worked in C (hereinafter “C”) and were retired on August 1, 2018 due to C’s managerial difficulties.

At the time of retirement, the Plaintiffs had a claim for wages, such as retirement allowances, as stated in the “Unpaid Amount” column in the attached Form 2 calculation sheet for C as to the retirement.

B. Meanwhile, C is an enterprise that produces and delivers new shoes, such as sandboxes and refining, and the Defendant entered into a product supply agreement with C with respect to new shoes produced by C, and from November 2016, if the Defendant orders C to pay part of the prepaid money, C shall be supplied to the Defendant after such production, and the Defendant shall pay part of the prepaid money to the Defendant, and the payment has been continuously traded in such a way as to withhold payment with the prepaid payment for the defect in the following month after the product entered into the product (hereinafter “instant product supply agreement”).

C On August 27, 2018, the Plaintiffs transferred KRW 226,738,523 of credit payment claims under the instant product supply agreement (as of August 23, 2018), and notified the Defendant of the transfer by content-certified mail on August 28, 2018, and the notification was sent to the Defendant on August 29, 2018.

Since then, the defendant was served with the attachment and assignment order and provisional attachment order for the unpaid claim for supply price according to the product supply agreement of this case in which D et al., the creditor of C et al. is the execution creditor.

E. On March 25, 2019, the Defendant made a mixed deposit of KRW 303,347,50,000 remaining after deducting KRW 84,716,50 from the defective product price in accordance with the instant product supply agreement, on the ground that “In the instant product supply agreement, the Defendant is not aware of whether the obligee is C or not, and on the other hand, the claim attachment and assignment order, provisional seizure order, etc. was served after the notice of the assignment of the above claim was given.”

Busan District Court Branch of Dong Branch.