(a)as shown in the reasons for the attachment of the claim;

(However, the creditor's "the plaintiff and the debtor" are deemed to be the "defendant"). 【The ground for recognition】 Each entry in the evidence Nos. 1 and 3 and the purport of the whole pleadings.

B. As to this, the Defendant asserts that the extinctive prescription of each of the instant claims has expired.

However, according to the aforementioned evidence, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for the payment order of deposit on September 4, 2007, which was before the expiration of the statute of limitations on each of the claims of this case, with the Seoul Northern District Court 2007 tead and 6879, which was before the expiration of the statute of limitations, and the Defendant did not raise any objection, and it can be acknowledged that it became final and conclusive on December 5, 2007. Since the Defendant filed an application for the payment order of this case on September 28, 2017, which was before the expiration of 10 years from the statute of limitations

2. According to the conclusion, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the money stated in the Disposition No. 1.