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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

As the plaintiff appealed against this, the subject of the judgment of this court is limited to the claim against the claim acquired from the LG card and Samsung Card.

2. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff received general installment financing loans and Samsung Card’s credit card loans against the Defendant respectively, and thus, sought payment of the principal and interest of each of the above claims against the Defendant.

3. According to the purport of Gap 2 (including additional numbers)'s entry and the entire argument, the plaintiff acquired a general installment financing loan claim (the balance 1,491,967 won) against the defendant of the LG card from the LG card and Samsung Card, and a credit card loan claim (the balance 1,606,582 won) against the defendant of Samsung Card under the Asset-Backed Securitization Act on May 13, 2005. On the same day, the plaintiff notified the defendant of the assignment of the claim by content-certified mail pursuant to Article 7 (1) of the Asset-Backed Securitization Act, and the above notification is presumed to have reached the defendant within a reasonable period.

However, in order for the plaintiff to seek the payment of the acquisition amount, the plaintiff must prove the occurrence of each claim that became the object of the acquisition.

A. It is insufficient to acknowledge that there was a general installment financing loan claim against the Defendant of the LG card as of May 13, 2005, on the sole basis of the descriptions of 2-2, 2-4, and 4 against the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Rather, according to Gap's statement, "Y" is in the indication column as to whether the above credit was fully paid.