The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The court below rejected the plaintiff's re-appeal against the defendant's defense of extinctive prescription on the ground that it is difficult to view that the defendant's representative director C sent e-mail to the plaintiff several times as stated in its holding, and it is not sufficient to view that the defendant's defense of extinctive prescription violates the principle of good faith

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on the approval of debt, waiver of prescription benefits, good faith and abuse of rights.

The assertion that the extinctive prescription of the claim against the defendant against the representative director C shall be interrupted at the time when the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant representative director C for the payment of the goods price, which is the one representative director C, but in substance a corporate form and is merely a C-owned enterprise behind the lawsuit, is not legitimate grounds for appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.