All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against each appellant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Plaintiff’s ground of appeal

A. The allegation in the grounds of appeal is that an advance payment under a goods supply contract includes a nature as a lending of money, and the act of receiving such advance payment constitutes a loan. Even though the custodian prior to the discontinuation of rehabilitation procedures for C&C Co., Ltd. received advance payment related to the supply of goods from the Defendant without obtaining permission from the court, the above custodian received such advance payment without obtaining permission from the court. Thus, the above advance payment is null and void pursuant to Article 61(3) of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, as it is a vehicle without obtaining permission from the court. However, the lower court’s acceptance of the Defendant’s defense that it offsets the claim for the return of the advance payment against the claim for the second and third sale with the claim for the return of the said advance payment.

B. However, while lending money means borrowing money, advance payment under a goods supply contract refers to the money paid in advance as the price for the goods to be supplied in the future. Thus, the receipt of the borrowed money and advance payment is different in its nature, and therefore, it cannot be deemed as the act of borrowing advance money that requires the court’s permission.

C. In the same purport, the judgment of the court below, which accepted the defendant's defense of offsetting the claim for the second and third purchase price, is acceptable. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles on the interpretation of the tea subject to the permission of the court.

The remaining grounds of appeal are as follows: (a) the receiver’s act of receiving advance payment without obtaining permission from the court is an act of re-taking without permission and cannot be asserted as invalid on the premise that such act is null and void; (b) the bona fide third party’s scope is not asserted as to the third party in good faith; or (c) the act of receiving advance payment as seen earlier.