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

A. The Defendant, around March 30, 2008, prepared a certificate of borrowing KRW 137,000,000 to D as of May 30, 2010 and issued to D with a maturity of KRW 137,00,000 (hereinafter “the first certificate of this case”).

(2) Around September 1, 2009, the Defendant: (a) prepared a loan certificate stating that D borrowed KRW 123,000,000 at a rate of 2% per annum for delay damages; and (b) written E in the column as joint and several surety of the instant secondary certificate (hereinafter “the instant secondary certificate”); and (c) written E.

B. On June 2, 2016, the Plaintiff, who acquired the Plaintiff’s claim, received KRW 260 million in total from D’s first-use credit and the claim on the second-use credit of this case from D, and D notified the Defendant on November 7, 2016.

[Grounds for recognition] The items of evidence Nos. 1 and 2 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the Defendant’s defense prior to the merits

A. The Defendant’s defense prior to the merits asserted that the Plaintiff received the instant claim for the transfer money on the ground that the Plaintiff acquired the instant 1 and 2 loans from D, since F, a creditor of D, received the entire claim for the loan to D prior to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff’s obligee, and therefore, the instant lawsuit has no interest in the lawsuit.

B. In a lawsuit for performance of judgment, the interest in the lawsuit is recognized to the claimant for the claim and the propriety of the claim is determined within the merits.

In addition, unlike the seizure and collection order as to the claim, even though the seizure and assignment order on the claim becomes final and conclusive, the transferee of the claim from the debtor or the obligor does not lose the party's standing to file a lawsuit for performance, and the priority between the assignment order and the assignment order is only determined within the main issue.

Therefore, the defendant's defense is not accepted.

3. The parties' arguments and the issues of this case

A. The plaintiff asserted 1 by the parties concerned. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff who acquired the second and second loans of this case from D the sum of the first and second loans of this case 260 million won.