1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant A shall complete the payment of KRW 160,341,13 and KRW 50,00,000 among the costs.

1. There is no dispute between the parties as to the facts stated in the separate sheet as to the cause of the claim, or it may be recognized as a whole in consideration of the whole purport of the pleadings as stated in Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including each number)

Therefore, unless there are special circumstances, the Defendants are obliged to pay the same money as the written order to the Plaintiff.

2. The Defendants asserted that the Bank’s claims acquired by the Plaintiff are commercial claims, and that the period of five years has expired, and that the period of five years has expired due to the completion of prescription.

Even if a commercial bond is a commercial bond, the period of extinctive prescription of the claim established by the judgment is ten years.

(Article 165 of the Civil Act). In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, the Industrial Bank of Korea filed a lawsuit against the Defendants for the payment of loans, etc., and recognized the fact that the judgment was rendered on June 30, 2005.

The fact that the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit on June 25, 2015 is apparent in the record, and thus, it cannot be said that the Plaintiff’s claim for the judgment of the Industrial Bank of Korea acquired by the Plaintiff has expired by prescription.

Therefore, the above assertion by the defendants is without merit.

3. Therefore, the plaintiff's claim shall be accepted on the ground of the reasons.