1. In a case where an obligor transferred to a creditor another claim against a third party for the purpose of securing a loan claim, and the transferred claim was reported as a rehabilitation claim by a creditor in the rehabilitation procedure against a third party after the date of the transfer, and was to substitute for the repayment of the rehabilitation claim by conversion of all or part of the rehabilitation claim into equity according to the rehabilitation plan, the amount equivalent to the appraised value of new shares acquired by the creditor as of the date of entry into force of the issuance of new shares shall be deemed to have been repaid (see Supreme Court Decisions 2002Da12703, 12710, Jan. 10, 2003; 2001Da64073, Aug. 22, 2003, etc.).

2. Based on the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, the court below acknowledged the following facts: (a) the Defendant acquired the instant credit sales claims against the Plaintiff, as collateral, while making the instant loan by means of credit sales claims having the right of recourse against the Plaintiff; (b) the Defendant reported the instant credit sales claims to the Defendant as rehabilitation claims in the rehabilitation procedure for the brick Construction Co., Ltd.; (c) the rehabilitation plan to convert the above credit sales claims into equity swap 75% of the credit sales claims into equity and substitute the payment of the claims on the date when the issuance of new shares becomes effective; and (d) the Defendant accepted the walls Construction Co., Ltd., which was the effective date of the issuance of new shares, on November 14, 2012, the fact that the market price of the new shares was 1,285 per share at the time when the issuance of new shares became effective; and (e) determined

3. Examining the above legal principles and records, although this part of the judgment below's explanation is insufficient, the conclusion that the defendant extinguished the amount equivalent to the appraised value as of the effective date of issuance of new stocks through a conversion of part of credit sales claims into equity among the loan claims in this case is justifiable. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there is no error of law by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

4. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim So-young (Presiding Justice)