A. The Credit Guarantee Fund filed a lawsuit against the Defendants and C and D for the claim for reimbursement under Seoul Central District Court Decision 2008Da42912, Mar. 18, 2009. The above court rendered a joint and several judgment of 480,407,707, and 104,936,987 won among them, from March 11, 1994; 76,375,848 won from February 21, 1994; 146,568,493 won from March 11, 1994; 46,453,752 won from March 17, 1994 to 10.8% from the following day to 198% from the date of the said judgment; 198% from March 198, 199 to 19.

B. On September 25, 2014, the Korea Credit Guarantee Fund transferred the claim for reimbursement (hereinafter “instant claim”) established by the said judgment to the Plaintiff, and around October 24, 2014, notified the Defendant of the assignment of the claim.

C. On March 27, 2019, the Plaintiff applied for the instant payment order for the interruption of extinctive prescription of the instant claim.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, 2, and 3 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The defendants' judgment as to the main defense of this case by the defendants is dismissed, and the liquidation is completed, so the lawsuit of this case is unlawful.

Even if the registration of the completion of liquidation of a juristic person has been completed, it shall continue to exist as a liquidated juristic person within the extent unless the liquidation affairs have been completed.

(See Supreme Court Decision 9Da66427, 73371 delivered on February 11, 2003). The instant claim occurred prior to the completion of liquidation affairs of the Defendants, and thus, the Defendants’ liability for reimbursement still remains.

Therefore, the main defense of the Defendants cannot be accepted on a different premise.

3. Judgment on the merits.