beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The facts of recognition are as follows: (a) the Plaintiff entered into a credit card affiliate agreement with D Co., Ltd. and transacted; (b) the benefit of time is lost due to the Plaintiff’s failure to repay the principal and interest; and (c) the contract was terminated; (b) the credit card payment claim against the Plaintiff as of July 22, 1996, the principal amount of KRW 3,794,421, interest amount of KRW 4,639,036 remain; and (c) the agreed interest rate is 19% per annum; (d) D Co., Ltd. transferred the said claim against the Plaintiff to E Co., Ltd. on December 31, 2002; and (e) E Co., Ltd. transferred the said claim to the Defendant on June 8, 2007; or (e) notified the Plaintiff of the said transfer to the Plaintiff may
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff’s claim for payment of credit card against the Plaintiff was terminated by prescription from July 2, 1996 when the credit card agreement was terminated, and the Defendant acquired the claim whose extinctive prescription has expired. As such, the Plaintiff did not have any obligation against the Defendant.
B. (1) Determination (1) If Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 added the purport of the entire pleadings, it can be acknowledged that Eul filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff by the Busan District Court 98Gaso12658, and the above court rendered a favorable judgment on July 14, 1998, which became final and conclusive August 13, 1998; the defendant who received the claim filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff for the claim for the amount of acquisition on June 5, 2008, which became final and conclusive on June 5, 2008; the defendant filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff by the Seoul East District Court 2018Gaso35833, and received a favorable judgment on September 18, 2018.
(2) The Plaintiff’s assertion that the statute of limitations expired is inconsistent with the res judicata of the said final judgment, and furthermore, according to the above facts of recognition, the claim against the Plaintiff was interrupted by each judicial claim.