A. The facts of recognition (1) On July 12, 1997, a private country mutual savings and finance company (hereinafter “private country mutual savings and finance company”) established the Defendant with the annual interest rate of 18% on July 12, 1998 and the annual interest rate of 23% on July 12, 1998 (hereinafter “first loan”), 20 million won due date of payment, 17% per annum on July 12, 2000, and 23% per annum on July 12, 2000 (hereinafter “second loan”).

(2) The Defendant lost the benefit of May 3, 1998. As of August 3, 2014, the debt balance of the first and second loans as of August 3, 2014 is 45,238,215 won in total, and damages for delay is 17% per annum.

(3) On June 21, 2013, a private mutual savings and finance company transferred the principal and interest of loans 1 and 2 to the Plaintiff. On January 15, 2015, the Plaintiff was delegated with the authority to notify the assignment of claims by a private mutual savings and finance company, and notified the Defendant of the transfer of the said claims by content-certified mail (Evidence A No. 8), but returned, on March 16, 2015, the Plaintiff notified the transfer by presenting the content-certified mail as of the third statutory date for pleading.

B. According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff’s acquisition of the Plaintiff’s claim for the first and second loans has an opposing power against the Defendant on March 16, 2015. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 45,238,215 as well as the amount of KRW 37,704,539 per annum from August 4, 2014 to the date of full payment.

2. Judgment on the defendant's defense

A. The defendant's defense that the first and second loans which are commercial claims were extinguished by prescription after the lapse of five years from May 3, 1998 when the defendant lost the benefit of time.

The fact that the first and second loans became due on May 3, 1998 is as seen earlier, and the fact that the lawsuit filed by the Plaintiff on August 4, 2014 for which the five-year commercial statute of limitations has lapsed is apparent in the record.

However, the statement No. 7 and the purport of the whole pleadings are as follows.