양수금
1. The judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The defendant is against the plaintiff succeeding intervenor 2,393.
1. Basic facts
A. On February 26, 1993, the Japanese Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Japan Bank”) concluded an installment savings-related loan agreement (hereinafter “instant loan”) with the Defendant without setting the interest rate of KRW 2,600,000 per annum 11.5% per annum, interest rate of delay damages, 20% per annum, and due date.
B. On September 28, 1994, in the case of loans rendered by Suwon District Court Sung-nam Branch 94 Ghana24582, the Defendant was sentenced to the judgment that the Defendant would pay to Japan Bank the remaining principal and interest of KRW 2,393,284 and interest of KRW 20% per annum from April 26, 1994 to the date of full payment (hereinafter “the first judgment”).
The above judgment became final and conclusive.
C. On December 30, 199, Japan Bank transferred its claim based on the first judgment to the Korea Finance Corporation on December 30, 199, and the Korea Finance Corporation transferred the above claim to the Plaintiff on December 28, 200, and notified the Defendant of the above assignment of claim on July 24, 2001.
In order to extend the prescription period of the above claim, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant as the court 2004GaBa1627388, and all the litigation materials, including a duplicate of the complaint, were served to the Defendant by public notice.
On December 6, 2004, the plaintiff was sentenced to the judgment of the first instance court of this case to the purport that the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 2,393,284 won and 20% interest per annum from April 26, 1994 to the date of full payment.
The original copy of the judgment of the first instance court of this case was served on December 29, 2004 by public notice to the defendant.
On August 28, 2012, the Plaintiff transferred the claim based on the judgment of the first instance court to the intervenors.
On December 20, 2013, the intervenor was delegated with the authority to notify the above assignment of claims by the plaintiff and notified the defendant of the assignment of claims.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 3, Eul evidence 1 to 3, Eul evidence 5 and the purport of whole pleadings
2. Judgment on the Intervenor’s claim
A. According to the above facts, the above facts are examined.