The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

1. The reasoning of the lower court’s reasoning for admitting the judgment of the first instance is as stated in the relevant part of the reasoning of the first instance judgment, except for the following portions, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The height of the judgment of the first instance court shall be from 11 to 18 of the judgment of the first instance.

A. The plaintiff asserts that compulsory execution based on the notarial deed of this case should not be allowed since the plaintiff's claim of this case constitutes a commercial obligation. Since five years have passed since the repayment date of September 3, 2009, the claim of this case constitutes a commercial obligation, and it is extremely apparent that the compulsory execution based on the notarial deed of this case should not be allowed. All acts committed against both parties as well as claims arising from acts which constitute a commercial activity only one of the parties, constitute commercial claims with the five-year statute of limitations under Article 64 of the Commercial Act. Such commercial activities include not only the basic commercial activity falling under any subparagraph of Article 46 of the Commercial Act but also ancillary commercial activities performed by the merchants for their own business. Further, according to Articles 5 (2) and 47 (1) and (2) of the Commercial Act, claims are presumed to be acts performed by merchants even if they do not engage in commercial activities, and since the acts by merchants are presumed to be conducted on behalf of the merchants, unless there is any counter-proof, such acts are presumed to be acts performed by the plaintiff for the business activity of this case.

The maturity of the instant claim is due.