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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

A. On August 28, 2001, the Defendant, on August 28, 2001, may repeatedly receive a loan within the limit of the loan extended by the lending deadline within the said lending deadline, setting at the lending limit of 5,00,000 won, annual interest rate of 98.5%, annual interest rate of 127.75%, annual interest rate of 127.75%, and the lending deadline of 30 October 30, 2006. The Defendant concluded a monetary loan agreement with the purport that the Defendant pays the debt balance at the expiration date of the lending deadline, and received a loan from the Ethnives date.

(hereinafter “instant loan”). (b)

Article 10 of the loan agreement of this case provides, “The debtor agrees to transfer the claims under this contract to a third party or offer them as security and does not raise any objection thereto,” and on June 30, 2003, the AWnivesday transferred the loan claim of this case to the plaintiff on December 12, 2003, respectively. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 18173, Dec. 12, 2003>

C. The principal of the instant loan is KRW 2,968,395 as of October 15, 2010, and the sum of principal and interest is KRW 21,338,080.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff who received the instant loan claim in succession at the rate of 38.69% per annum, calculated from October 16, 2010 to the date of full payment, as to the sum of the principal and interest of the instant loan claim amounting to KRW 21,338,080 and the principal amounting to KRW 2,968,395, which is the base date, to the Plaintiff who received the instant loan claim in succession,

3. Judgment on the defendant's defense of extinctive prescription

A. The claim for the loan of this case, which is a summary of the assertion, is in progress from September 2002 to September 2002, and the plaintiff filed the lawsuit of this case after the lapse of five years from that payment.