1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. All the claims of the plaintiff and the plaintiff succeeding intervenor are dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 8, 200, the Defendant lost the benefit of time due to delinquency in paying the credit card fee while obtaining a credit card from the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation (the banking business division among the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation's credit businesses was divided and established by the Plaintiff). As of September 25, 2003, the credit card use fee in arrears is KRW 4,93,396, and overdue interest is KRW 5,937,50.

B. On March 31, 2009, the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation transferred the credit card use price claim against the defendant to the plaintiff succeeding intervenor, and on April 27, 2009, the plaintiff succeeding intervenor notified the defendant of the above assignment of claim with the delegation from the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation.

C. The Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor applied for the intervention in the trial of the party.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 3 through 6, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. As seen earlier, the Plaintiff’s claim is without merit, since the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation transferred the credit card use fee claim against the Defendant to the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff.

B. According to the above facts of recognition 1, the defendant is obligated to pay the above transfer money to the plaintiff succeeding intervenor, the transferee of the above credit card use-price claim, barring special circumstances. 2) The defendant raises a defense that the extinctive prescription has expired.

According to the above evidence, it is evident in the record that the defendant's interest on the credit card use-price claim against the defendant was lost on or around November 2002, and that the lawsuit of this case was filed only on August 21, 2008 after the five-year commercial prescription period has lapsed.

Therefore, a credit card use-price claim has already expired before the filing of the lawsuit in this case, and the defendant can oppose the plaintiff's successor, the transferee of the claim for the above reasons.

3. The plaintiff succeeding intervenor.