Guide to Claim Assignments: Effect and Requirements for Asserting Them

Based on 54 consultation cases · Updated October 4, 2026 · Translated from the Korean original.

A claim is assigned by agreement between the assignor and the assignee, but requirements such as notice or consent must be met to assert the right against the debtor or another assignee. The outcome may vary depending on an agreement prohibiting assignment, the debtor's defenses and right of set-off, and the type of claim. You should therefore not assume that the assignment alone entitles you to demand payment.

People involved → Assignor → Assignee → Debtor → A claim is assigned by agreement → Is the claim assignable, or is separate consideration provided where required? → yes · Civil Act Article 449 → Did the assignor give notice to the debtor or did the debtor consent? → no → yes · Civil Act Article 450 → For third-party priority, did fixed-date notice reach the debtor or was fixed-date consent given? → May assert the assignment subject to the checks below → Do not assume you can demand payment or claim third-party priority → Check debtor defenses and set-off → The debtor may raise grounds arising before notice. Check any objection reserved at consent and later set-off claims. → Check priority timing → For multiple assignees, compare when fixed-date notice reached the debtor or fixed-date consent was given. → Check special claim rules → Wages cannot be paid directly to an assignee. An assign…

Key points

As a rule, a claim payable to a specifically identified creditor may be assigned. However, separate consideration is required if assignment is not permitted by the nature of the claim or if an agreement prohibits assignment (Civil Act, Article 449 (민법 제449조)).
For an assignee to assert the assignment against the debtor, the assignor must give notice or the debtor must consent. To assert it against a third party other than the debtor, notice or consent must be documented in a document bearing a fixed date (Civil Act, Article 450 (민법 제450조)).
If a claim is assigned to more than one person, the relevant comparison is not limited to the dates of the assignment agreements or the fixed dates written on the documents. It is when notice bearing a fixed date reached the debtor or when consent bearing a fixed date was given (Case 1).
Even if an agreement prohibits assignment, the debtor may not be able to rely on it against an assignee who neither knew of the agreement nor was grossly negligent in being unaware of it. The debtor asserting the assignee's knowledge or gross negligence must prove it (Civil Act, Article 449(2) (민법 제449조 제2항), Cases 3, 9, and 25).
The debtor may assert against the assignee any grounds that arose against the assignor before receiving notice of the assignment. If the debtor consented, it is important, among other things, whether the debtor reserved an objection at the time of consent. As a rule, the debtor cannot set off a claim acquired afterward against the assignee (Civil Act, Article 451 (민법 제451조), Cases 10 and 16).
The assignee may give notice as the assignor's agent, but the agency relationship must be apparent. Notice given only in the assignee's own name may not be effective (Cases 4 and 6).
Even if a wage claim may be assigned, the employer cannot pay the assignee directly. In addition, an assignment made primarily to enable litigation may be invalid (Labor Standards Act, Article 43(1) (근로기준법 제43조 제1항); Trust Act, Article 7 (신탁법 제7조); Cases 8 and 21).
A claim for return of a deposit under an unregistered lease may be assigned subject to the condition that the claim for return arises in the future. Also, even if the landlord and tenant renew their agreement after a claim for return of the lease deposit is assigned, the renewal may not take effect against the assignee (Cases 2 and 7).

Frequently asked questions

Q. If I receive an assignment of a claim, can I immediately demand payment from the debtor?

A transfer agreement alone can transfer a claim between the assignor and the assignee, but to assert the assignment against the debtor, the assignor must give notice or the debtor must consent. If priority against a third party is at issue, notice or consent must also be documented in a document bearing a fixed date (Civil Act, Article 450 (민법 제450조)).

Case 1, Case 6, Case 23

Q. If two people receive assignments of the same claim, who has priority?

Priority between assignees is not determined solely by which assignment agreement was made first. The relevant comparison is when notice of the assignment bearing a fixed date reached the debtor or when consent bearing a fixed date was given (Case 1).

Case 1, Case 22

Q. Can I receive an assignment of a claim that is subject to an agreement prohibiting assignment?

If an agreement prohibits assignment, the debtor may invoke it against an assignee who knew of the agreement or was unaware of it through gross negligence. If the assignee neither knew of the agreement nor was grossly negligent in being unaware of it, the debtor may not be able to rely on the agreement against the assignee. The debtor must prove the assignee's knowledge or gross negligence (Civil Act, Article 449(2) (민법 제449조 제2항), Cases 3 and 9).

Case 3, Case 9, Case 25

Q. Can the debtor set off a claim acquired after consenting to an assignment?

As a rule, after the debtor consents to an assignment, the debtor cannot assert a set-off against the assignee based on a claim the debtor acquires against the assignor afterward. However, a set-off may be allowed if, before the assignment, a circumstance giving rise to the set-off already existed and the assigned claim was subject to simultaneous performance with the debtor's claim (Civil Act, Article 451 (민법 제451조), Cases 10 and 16).

Case 10, Case 16

Q. Can the assignee give notice of an assignment on the assignor's behalf?

The assignee may give notice as the assignor's agent. However, the notice must make clear that the assignee is acting as the assignor's agent. If the assignee gives notice only in the assignee's own name without indicating the agency relationship, the notice may be ineffective (Case 6).

Case 4, Case 6

Q. If a wage claim is assigned, can the assignee demand direct payment of wages from the company?

A wage claim itself may be assigned, but wages must be paid directly to the employee. Therefore, the assignee cannot demand direct payment of wages from the employer, and the employer must not pay wages to the assignee (Labor Standards Act, Article 43(1) (근로기준법 제43조 제1항), Case 21).

Case 21

Q. If the lease is renewed after a claim for return of the lease deposit has been assigned, does the assignee have to wait?

Even if the landlord and tenant renew the lease or extend its term after notice of the assignment, the effect of their agreement may not extend to the assignee of the claim for return of the security deposit. However, in some cases, repayment of the deposit and surrender of the residence must be performed together, so whether the tenant has surrendered the residence must also be considered (Case 7).

Case 2, Case 7

Q. If an assignment agreement is rescinded, can the assignor immediately make a new demand against the debtor?

If the assignment agreement is rescinded after notice of the assignment has already been given, the assignee may need to notify the debtor of the rescission before the assignor can rely on it to make a new demand against the debtor. Even if the agreement that gave rise to the assignment ceases to be effective through termination or otherwise, the assignee may have a duty to notify the debtor that the claim has reverted (Cases 12 and 14).

Case 12, Case 14

Q. Can I assign a claim to a family member so they can handle litigation?

An assignment of a claim made primarily to enable litigation may be invalid under an analogous application of Article 7 of the Trust Act. The circumstances of the assignment, the relationship between the parties, and the process leading to litigation after the assignment should all be considered. An assignment between family members is not necessarily valid in every case (Case 8).

Case 8

Relevant laws

Civil Act, Article 108(2) (민법 제108조 제2항)
Civil Act, Article 114 (민법 제114조)
Civil Act, Article 115 (민법 제115조)
Civil Act, Article 149 (민법 제149조)
Civil Act, Article 449 (민법 제449조)
Civil Act, Article 450 (민법 제450조)
Civil Act, Article 451 (민법 제451조)
Civil Act, Article 452(2) (민법 제452조 제2항)
Civil Act, Article 487 (민법 제487조)
Civil Act, Article 667 (민법 제667조)
Civil Act, Article 667(3) (민법 제667조 제3항)
Civil Act, Article 668 (민법 제668조)
Civil Act, Article 669 (민법 제669조)
Civil Act, Article 670 (민법 제670조)
Civil Act, Article 671 (민법 제671조)

Watch out for

The mere existence of a document bearing a fixed date does not determine priority over a third party. You must check when notice was received or when consent was given.
Notice of an assignment merely informs the debtor of the assignment and may not, by itself, be treated as a demand for performance of the claim. If a claim is subject to a peremptory period, you should check whether the right was exercised separately (Case 18).
The general rules on assignment may not apply in the same way to every type of claim. Claims for registration of transfer of ownership, wage claims, deposit claims, and assignments made for security purposes each raise separate issues (Cases 11, 13, 17, 21, and 25).

Source cases

This guide was compiled by AI from the following Korea Legal Aid Corporation consultation cases (in Korean).

This guide is general legal information about Korean law, not legal advice for your situation. For a specific case, consult a lawyer or the Korea Legal Aid Corporation (call 132 in Korea).