A. The Credit Guarantee Fund filed a lawsuit against the Defendant, B, etc. against the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2008Da312144, and the above court rendered a judgment on May 28, 2009 that "the Defendant, B, etc. shall jointly and severally pay to the Credit Guarantee Fund the amount of KRW 153,963,702 and KRW 153,863,707 each year from August 26, 2008 to January 10, 2009, and KRW 20% each year from the next day to the date of full payment," and the above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

B. On November 30, 2018, the Credit Guarantee Fund transferred the claim for reimbursement (hereinafter “instant claim”) established by the said judgment to the Plaintiff. On December 21, 2018, the Credit Guarantee Fund notified the Defendant of the assignment of the claim.

C. As of April 25, 2019, the instant claim remains at KRW 355,613,143 in total (i.e., principal amount of KRW 151,319,680 or damages for delay).

On May 2, 2019, the Plaintiff applied for the instant payment order for the interruption of extinctive prescription of the instant claim.

【Reasons for Recognition】 Each entry of evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (including paper numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff that acquired the instant claim the amount of KRW 355,613,143, and the principal amount of KRW 151,319,680, which is calculated at the rate of delay damages set forth in the above final judgment, as the Plaintiff seeks, within the scope of the interest rate on delay damages set forth in the above final judgment, 10% per annum from April 26, 2019, the day following the above base date until May 12, 2019, which is the delivery date of the copy of the instant complaint, and 15% per annum from the following day to the day of complete payment.

B. The defendant's assertion that the representative liquidator of the defendant was granted immunity, and thus cannot comply with the plaintiff's claim. However, the defendant's claim in this case is not a claim against the defendant company and a claim against the representative of the defendant company is not a claim against the defendant company.