A. On April 14, 2001, the Plaintiff, under the Defendant’s joint and several surety, lent KRW 35 million to B on April 14, 2004, with interest rate of KRW 12.8% per annum (it applies to the fluctuation rate, December 19, 2005, and 12.1% per annum from December 19, 2005) and 22% per annum (However, from February 20, 2006 to 9.9% per annum).

B. On December 19, 2005, B paid interest amounting to KRW 407,099 (=interest amounting to KRW 406,090) on the said loan to the Plaintiff (=interest amounting to KRW 1,040). However, thereafter, the said loan did not pay the principal and interest thereon.

C. As of July 24, 2014, the sum of the principal and interest on the above loan as of July 24, 2014 is KRW 100,649,950 (=principal interest of KRW 35 million or damages for delay plus KRW 65,649,950).

[Grounds for recognition] The items of evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, as a joint and several surety for the above loan debt, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the total amount of the loan principal of KRW 100,649,950, and the principal of KRW 35 million from July 25, 2014 to September 19, 2014, the service date of the original copy of the instant payment order, 9.9% per annum, the agreed delay damages rate of KRW 9.9%, and the delay damages calculated at the rate of 20% per annum as prescribed by the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of full payment.

B. The defendant defense that the plaintiff's above loan claim expired by the statute of limitations. As seen earlier, it is obvious that the plaintiff's above loan claim was due on April 14, 2004. The plaintiff's lawsuit of this case was filed on July 31, 2014 after the lapse of 10 years from the lawsuit of this case. However, as seen earlier, as seen earlier, Eul, the principal debtor, paid 407,099 won as interest of the above loan to the plaintiff on December 19, 2005, which was before the expiration of the statute of limitations period. Some of the above repayment constitutes the approval of the debt, and thus the statute of limitations period for the principal debtor is suspended, and it is effective against the defendant as the guarantor (Article 440 of the Civil Act). Accordingly, the defendant's above lawsuit of this case has the effect of suspending the statute of limitations against the principal debtor (Article 440 of the Civil Act).