1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The Defendant, along with C and D on June 12, 2006, prepared a loan certificate stating that “the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 15 million from the Plaintiff, and on June 19, 2006, the due date for repayment,” (hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”) with the Plaintiff as of June 12, 2006, may not be disputed between the parties or may be recognized by the statement of evidence A. Thus, the Defendant is obliged to pay KRW 15 million to the Plaintiff, barring special circumstances.

2. Judgment on the defendant's defense of extinctive prescription

A. As to this, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff's claim based on the loan certificate of this case expired due to the expiration of the statute of limitations.

As to the preparation process of the loan certificate of this case, the plaintiff asserted that the defendant, together with C and D, recommended an agent for reproductive sales to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff paid 15 million won at the agent's expense. The plaintiff agreed to revoke the agent's establishment and received the loan certificate of this case from the defendant C and D (hereinafter "the defendant, etc."). On the other hand, the defendant's obligation falls under the commercial obligation even if the plaintiff's assertion is made. (On the other hand, the defendant purchased clothes equivalent to 15 million won from C and requested the plaintiff to prepare the loan certificate of this case in order to refund the 15 million won in its clothes, and then revoked the loan certificate of this case, the plaintiff's claim of this case also constitutes the commercial obligation of this case, and the plaintiff's claim of this case has expired since the expiration of the extinctive prescription period from June 19, 2006, which is the due date for the loan certificate of this case.

3. Conclusion.