The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 25, 2007, the Plaintiff agreed to receive KRW 100 million from the Defendants (principal debtor: Defendant A and joint guarantor: Defendant B) instead of transferring the claim for construction cost of KRW 100 million to the Korea Management Education Association, an incorporated association (hereinafter “instant Association”).

B. On April 26, 2007, the Plaintiff received KRW 40 million out of the above KRW 100 million from the Defendants, and on October 18, 2007, written a notarial deed (Evidence A No. 1; hereinafter “instant notarial deed”) with the Defendants as follows with respect to the remaining KRW 60 million.

Article 1. The Obligor (Defendant A) approved the fact that he has assumed the following obligations from the previous Creditor (Plaintiff) and promised to repay the obligations under this Agreement and consented to it by the obligee. In recent years, Article 2 (Period and Method of Repayment) of the Pedi-fed Pedi-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-f-fa-f

Article 3 (Interest) Interest shall be the amount at the rate of 24% (25th of each month) per annum.

Article 5 (Compensation for Delay) When the debtor delays the repayment of the above amount, damages for delay shall be paid to the creditor at the rate of 24% per annum to the delayed amount.

Article 8 (Joint Guarantee) The surety (Defendant B) has agreed to guarantee the debtor's obligation under this Agreement and to discharge the debtor's obligation jointly with the debtor.

The Defendants paid to the Plaintiff KRW 10 million on November 20, 2007, and KRW 5 million on January 31, 2008, respectively, with the repayment of the instant notarial deed debt.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. With respect to the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants for the performance of the remaining obligations of the notarial deed of this case, the Defendants asserted that the above claims of the Plaintiff were extinguished by the lapse of the five-year commercial prescription period stipulated in Article 64 of the Commercial Act.

(b) 1.