1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. In addition to adding the following judgments as to the defendant's argument, the reasoning of the court's explanation on this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is citing it as it is by the main text of Article 420

[Additional Provisions] The defendant initially invested money in the company at the defendant's recommendation, and thereafter, the defendant prepared a cash loan certificate of this case with the defendant's promise to pay KRW 26 million out of the above investment amount to the plaintiff, and the claim of this case is a commercial claim and its five-year commercial prescription period is applicable to the claim of this case. Since the lawsuit of this case was filed after the lapse of five years from May 19, 2008, which was the final repayment date of the defendant's final repayment date, the statute of limitations has expired.

In addition, the plaintiff decided to invest money in the "C" company at the defendant's recommendation, and invested in the above company the sum of KRW 30 million on March 21, 2008. The defendant prepared a cash loan certificate of this case with the purport that the defendant promised to pay KRW 26 million out of the above investment amount on March 22, 2008 and delivered it to the plaintiff. However, such circumstance alone cannot be viewed as commercial claim.

(A) If the Plaintiff’s claim constitutes a commercial claim, the Plaintiff, or the Defendant’s claim should have arisen from a claim arising from a commercial activity under Article 64 of the Commercial Act. Therefore, it cannot be recognized that the ten-year extinctive prescription period is applicable to the Plaintiff’s claim as a civil claim. However, it is apparent in the record that the instant lawsuit was filed on September 15, 2015, which was before the lapse of ten years from May 19, 2008, the final repayment date of the Defendant’s claim, and thus, the Defendant’s above assertion is groundless

2. If so, the judgment of the first instance court is legitimate, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.