According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay the above amount of reimbursement and damages for delay that the plaintiff acquired to the plaintiff.

2. Determination on the claim for the completion of extinctive prescription

A. The defendant's claim that the plaintiff acquired is completed after the lapse of 10 years from May 31, 2007, which is the date of subrogation. Thus, the defendant cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim.

B. In light of the overall purport of the pleadings as to the evidence evidence Nos. 1 through 5, C management institution D management institution’s claim payment on May 31, 2007 by subrogation of the defendant’s debt to E-association, and on November 12, 2009, filed a lawsuit against the defendant for the payment of the claim for reimbursement by subrogation under the Gwangju District Court 2009Gadan17279, and issued a judgment ordering the payment of 153,984,441 won by subrogation on April 20, 2010, and its delay damages, etc., and the above judgment became final and conclusive on May 7, 2020, and the fact that the plaintiff acquired the claim for reimbursement on December 21, 2017, and completed the notification, respectively, and it is clear that the record of this case’s claim payment order by subrogation against the defendant as above and the record No. 2020,240,200.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion that the claim for indemnity of this case that the plaintiff acquired has expired by prescription is without merit, and the plaintiff's assertion pointing this out is with merit.

3. The plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.