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

A. The fact that the Plaintiff acquired the claim against the Defendant of Seoul Guarantee Insurance and Hyundai Capital, as indicated below, on June 12, 2009, and notified the Defendant of the acquisition of the claim is without dispute between the parties.

Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to perform the obligation to pay the above amount to the Plaintiff.

Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co. 5, 472, 670, 104, 798, 677, 468 Jun. 12, 2009, Hyundai Capital Co. 27, 2002.3.27, 996, 202.21,089,089,04885, 250 Jun. 12, 2009, 2009.

Meanwhile, on December 10, 2009, the Plaintiff asserted that he received credit card payment claim (the loan balance of KRW 2,750,379, the attempted interest of KRW 5,833,341) from the Defendant of Solomon Mutual Savings Bank from the Defendant, but there is no evidence to prove the existence of the Plaintiff’s claim. Thus, this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

2. The defendant's defense is a defense that all of the above claims of the Seoul Guarantee Insurance and Hyundai Capital have expired, so the judgment in favor of the defendant of the Seoul Guarantee Insurance was rendered on November 11, 2003, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on December 4, 2003, and there is no dispute between the parties. Since the lawsuit in this case was filed on December 11, 2010, the above claim was completed and expired before the lawsuit in this case was brought.

Next, since the time limit for the loan of the above claim against the defendant of Hyundai Capital is January 20, 2003, the time limit for the expiration of the statute of limitations is January 20, 2003, barring any special circumstance, and since the above claim is a commercial bond, the five-year statute of limitations is applied. The lawsuit of this case was filed on December 11, 2012, which is five years from the initial date of the above time limit.