A. The Plaintiff did not repay the amount of KRW 50 million to the Defendants, which are married couple, and subsequently filed an application with the Daegu District Court for payment order against the Defendants seeking payment of KRW 50 million and delay damages therefrom, as the Plaintiff did not repay the amount of KRW 50 million.

B. In order to extend the extinctive prescription against the above payment order, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendants for the payment of the above loan with the Daegu District Court 2007Kadan67125, and was sentenced on July 27, 2007, "the defendant jointly and severally filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff for the payment of the above loan amounting to 50 million won and 24% per annum from July 1, 1998 to October 14, 1998, and 25% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment." The above judgment was finalized on August 18, 2007.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts as to the cause of the claim, the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the plaintiff the above loans of KRW 50 million and damages for delay calculated by the rate of 15% per annum from June 1, 1999 to the date of full payment.

B. As to Defendant B’s assertion, the above Defendant, as Daegu District Court Decision 2014Do358, 2014Hadan358, decided to grant immunity on October 28, 2014 by granting bankruptcy and application for immunity, and the above Defendant did not enter the above loan claims in the creditor list in bad faith, and thus, the above Defendant claimed that exemption was granted.

According to the evidence evidence evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the above defendant was granted immunity on October 28, 2014 by the Daegu District Court 2014, 358, 2014Haak358 and filed a bankruptcy and application for immunity, and the above immunity became final and conclusive on November 12, 2014, and the fact that the plaintiff's above loan claim was not stated in the creditor list is acknowledged, but according to the above, the amount of the plaintiff's loan claim is the financial institution.