2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

The term "Defendant A" is "Co-Defendant A of the first instance trial (hereinafter referred to as "A"), "Defendant C" is "Co-Defendant C of the first instance trial (hereinafter referred to as "C")," and "Defendants" are different from "Defendant A, A, and C".

B. On the third page of the judgment of the court of first instance, the term “day” of the first instance No. 18 shall be read as “day”.

C. On No. 4 of the first instance judgment, “A evidence No. 6 and No. 7” are added to the first instance judgment [based grounds for recognition].

2. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except in the following cases: (a) Nos. 4, 18, and 19 of the written judgment of the court of first instance; and (b) such part is cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

“(3) Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 20,114,008 and delay damages for KRW 20,000 among them within the scope of KRW 260,000 and KRW 62,748,095 and delay damages for KRW 10,000,00,00, respectively, upon the Plaintiff’s partial claim as shown in the attached claim statement, as shown in the attached claim statement.”

3. Conclusion, the defendant is jointly and severally liable with A to pay to the plaintiff 20,114,00,008 won and damages for delay at the rate of 19% per annum within the limit of 112,897,648 won and 360,000,000 won and damages for delay at the rate of 19% per annum within the limit of 260,000 won from October 1, 199 to the date of full payment, and 62,748,095 won and damages for delay at the rate of 19% per annum from February 6, 2001 to the date of full payment.

Thus, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant raised for the interruption of extinctive prescription based on the judgment of this case is reasonable.