The defendant.

A. As to the Defendant on December 12, 2005, the Pakistan Mutual Savings Bank (which changed from September 27, 2010 to Tomato2 Savings Bank; hereinafter the same shall apply) was sentenced to a judgment that "the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff 13,257,461 won and 3,074,076 won among them, from May 19, 2001 to 4,843,349 won with 35% interest per annum from June 23, 2004 to the day of full payment," and the judgment became final and conclusive on January 13, 2006.

(hereinafter referred to as “judgment in a prior suit”). (b)

On June 12, 2011, Pakistan Mutual Savings Bank transferred the above loan claims against the Defendant to the Plaintiff, and on August 12, 2011, notified the Defendant of the assignment of the above claims and sent the above notification to the Defendant at that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 7, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff, a transferee of the claim 13,257,461 won and 3,074,076 won among them from May 19, 2001 to the date of full payment, 4,843,349 won with 35% per annum from June 23, 2004 to the date of full payment. If the plaintiff files the lawsuit of this case for the extension of the extinctive prescription period of the claim established by the preceding judgment, there is a benefit of protecting rights as a lawsuit for the interruption of extinctive prescription.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, including the claim extended at the trial, and it is accepted. It is so decided as per Disposition by accepting the plaintiff's incidental appeal and changing the judgment of the first instance as above.