On August 16, 2019, the Plaintiff was issued a claim attachment and assignment order (hereinafter “instant assignment order”) with respect to C’s claim against C based on an executory exemplification of the judgment in the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2017Gahap571676 (hereinafter “C”) with respect to “amounting to KRW 1,700,000,000, and the amount of loan that C is to receive from the Defendant from the Defendant from the third obligor and up to the above claim amount” (hereinafter “instant assignment order”). The instant assignment order was delivered to the Defendant on August 20, 2019 and became final and conclusive on October 25, 2019.

C On December 14, 2010, the Defendant lent 1,150,000,000 won (hereinafter “instant loan”) to the Defendant at the rate of 5% per annum, and agreed that the principal and interest shall be repaid at the same time on December 14, 2013. However, on December 13, 2013, the Defendant agreed that the repayment period of KRW 1,150,000,000 and the annual interest of KRW 5% per annum shall be paid at the same time on December 14, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] In light of the facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including branch numbers if there is a provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the facts alleged to this court, the purport of the entire pleadings, and the facts of the above recognition as to the claim for judgment as to the loan of this case, the interest accrued from December 14, 2010 to August 20, 2019, which was delivered to the third obligor by the assignment order of this case from August 20, 2019, shall be KRW 49,383,561 [= KRW 1,50,00,000 x 5% x 5% x (880 days to December 14, 2018 to August 20, 2019)].

Therefore, barring any special circumstance to the Plaintiff, the Defendant is obligated to pay the instant loan and its interest totaling KRW 1,649,383,561 (= KRW 1,150,000,000) pursuant to the instant assignment order and delay damages therefrom, barring any special circumstance to the Plaintiff.

The defendant's argument and the defendant's primary argument that the defendant borrowed KRW 1,150,00,00 from C, but thereafter C, due to the violation of the commercial sale contract, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, and L.