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

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the court of first instance.

A. C: (a) on September 5, 2008, the principal debtor, the guarantor, the loan 18 million won; (b) the due date for repayment of the loan 30% per annum on October 5, 2009; and (c) the Defendant asserts that there was no fact in writing the above loan certificate.

Although the above loan certificate is accompanied by the defendant's certificate of personal seal impression, a copy of resident registration card, and a copy of resident registration certificate, the defendant's seal is not affixed to the loan certificate.

Then, C wired 15 million won from the account in the name of the defendant to the account in the name of the defendant.

(hereinafter referred to as “the loan of this case”). B. The above loan of this case

C on April 10, 2013, Sungdon Co., Ltd. transferred the instant loan claim to Hodon Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Sadon”) on the same day. on September 15, 2014, Sungdonn transferred the instant loan claim to the Plaintiff, and issued a certificate of the content of notifying the assignment of the claim to the Defendant on the same day.

C. Meanwhile, on November 19, 2009, the Defendant filed an application for adjudication of bankruptcy and exemption from liability with the District Court Decision 2009Hadan7077, 2009Ma7071, and the above court rendered a declaration of bankruptcy against the Defendant on February 8, 2010, and the decision became final and conclusive on September 2, 2010. The above decision became final and conclusive on September 17, 2010. On September 5, 2008, the list 13 of the creditors submitted by the Defendant stated that D borrowed KRW 15 million to the Defendant on September 5, 2008, and that the principal amount remains at KRW 8 million.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 5, evidence 1 to 2-1, 2, 3-1, 2, 4, 5, Eul evidence 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence 4-1, 2, and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the lawfulness of the instant lawsuit

A. As to the Plaintiff’s lawsuit against the Defendant seeking such exemption as the transferee of the instant loan, the Defendant, on September 17, 2010, issued a safety defense to the effect that the Plaintiff cannot file a lawsuit against the Defendant, on the grounds that the decision to grant immunity against the Defendant became final and conclusive.