A. B, on March 25, 199, the repayment period from the Peace Bank was set as March 24, 2002 and received a loan of KRW 4 million (hereinafter “instant loan”). At the time, the Plaintiff guaranteed the above loan obligations to the Peace Bank as joint and several sureties.

B. The instant loan claim was transferred to the Defendant on April 15, 2009 via LSPS SPS SPcomcom (S) and Pdives Co., Ltd.

C. The Defendant asserted that the instant loan obligation remains 13,920,358 won as of October 23, 2013 (the principal amount among them is KRW 3,875,726), and filed an application for payment order with the Seoul Central District Court as Seoul Central District Court No. 2013,72029 against the Plaintiff, a joint and several surety, and that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant 13,920,358 won and 3,875,726 won per annum 18% per annum from October 24, 2013 to the date of full payment” was finalized on November 7, 2013.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant payment order”). [Grounds for recognition] The entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination

A. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of claim, the loan claim of this case was completed on March 24, 2007 after five years from March 24, 2002, which was due date (the defendant asserted that the statute of limitations has been interrupted, and the defendant does not assert that the loan claim of this case was not a commercial claim) and the defendant's joint and several guarantee claim of the loan of this case against the plaintiff of this case against the plaintiff of this case, which is the defendant's principal debtor, was extinguished on the ground of the expiration of the statute of limitations.

B. As to the defendant's assertion 1, the defendant asserted that the time limit for extinctive prescription has been interrupted because the peace bank or the transferee of the claim notified the repayment of the obligation to B several times, but there is no evidence to acknowledge this.