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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

A. B entered into a credit card loan agreement with C Co., Ltd. on December 2002, and the Defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the obligation under the above loan agreement on December 4, 2002.

B. On August 29, 2003, C Co., Ltd. transferred the principal and interest of the loan (the principal of the loan is KRW 17,384,393) to the Plaintiff according to the above loan agreement, and around that time, notified B of the transfer of the above claim.

C. On March 15, 2007, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant and B as the Daegu District Court 2007Gaso8386, and the above court rendered on June 11, 2007, “The Defendant and B jointly paid to the Plaintiff the amount calculated at the rate of 25% per annum from February 17, 2007 to the date of full payment (hereinafter “the judgment in favor of the Plaintiff”) with respect to KRW 34,561,767 and its KRW 17,384,393.” The above judgment became final and conclusive on July 17, 2007.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion asserted against the Defendant that the Plaintiff sought payment of money based on the claim established by the judgment of the previous suit of this case against the Defendant. The Plaintiff’s participation in the bankruptcy procedure (Tgu District Court 2007Hadan4380) against B, which is the principal debtor, was interrupted until December 21, 2007, which is the date of the above declaration of bankruptcy, or the extinctive prescription of the claim against B was interrupted due to the Plaintiff’s acceptance of the claim against the Plaintiff on January 7, 2008 due to the list of creditors submitted by B in the above bankruptcy procedure, which was served on the Plaintiff on January 7, 2008. Since the interruption of prescription becomes effective against the Defendant who is the guarantor, there is a benefit in protecting rights, and the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant was not completed.

3. Determination

A. Since a final and conclusive judgment in favor of a final and conclusive judgment regarding the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit has res judicata effect, the party who received the final and conclusive judgment is the other party to the previous lawsuit.