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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

A. 1) Promotion Savings Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Promotion Savings Bank”) is limited to:

(C) On June 19, 2006, after entering into a credit transaction agreement with the Defendant, the Defendant is only C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”).

(D) No. 214, 804, 305, 1002 (hereinafter referred to as “instant apartment”).

) A total of KRW 37,800,000 (=18,900,000 Won 18,900,000) as a loan for sales in lots was leased at interest rate of 12% per annum, 25% per annum, 25% per annum, and June 19, 2007 on a loan date (hereinafter referred to as the “credit transaction agreement of this case”) (hereinafter referred to as the “credit transaction agreement of this case”) as the “loan of this case”, and the relevant loans.

2) At the time of the instant credit transaction agreement, Defendant B (hereinafter “B”) jointly and severally guaranteed the Defendant’s loan obligation against the Plaintiff at the time of the instant credit transaction agreement.

B. The term of credit extension of the instant loan has been extended several times, and the Promotion Savings Bank concluded a credit transaction agreement with the Defendant on June 27, 2011, with a view to extending the term of credit up to April 15, 201, on a total of 37,800,000 won of the instant loan with the Defendant, on April 15, 2012, at the interest rate of 12% per annum and 25% per annum.

C. From October 27, 2011, the Defendant delayed payment of interest. The principal and interest of the instant loan is KRW 68,055,824 as of January 25, 2015 (i.e., principal amount of KRW 37,800,000 overdue interest, etc.).

On the other hand, the Promotion Savings Bank was declared bankrupt on May 20, 2013 by Seoul Central District Court 2013Hahap64, and the plaintiff was appointed as bankruptcy trustee on the same day.

[Reasons for Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 11-3, Gap evidence Nos. 2, 6, 10-10, 3 through 5, and 9-1 and 2-1 and 2-1 of each of the evidences Nos. 6 (Application for Extension of Credit Period) were forged, but there is no evidence to acknowledge the above facts, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.