1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 23, 2005, Korea Lease Credit Union filed a payment order against the defendant with the Seoul Central District Court 2005 tea 46936, and on September 23, 2005, the above court issued a payment order stating that "the defendant will pay 264,215,412 won and 19% per annum from November 13, 1995 to September 18, 2000, and 25% per annum from September 19, 200 to the day of full payment (hereinafter "the payment order of this case"). The above payment order was served on the defendant on October 4, 2005 and confirmed on October 19, 205.

(B) The Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant recognized by the instant payment order (hereinafter “instant claim”).

On May 27, 2011, the Korean Loan Co., Ltd. transferred the instant bonds to the KEL Loan Co., Ltd., and notified the Defendant of the fact of transferring the claims at that time.

On July 8, 2014, the KEL loan transferred the instant credit to the Plaintiff, and notified the Defendant of the transfer of credit on January 25, 2016.

C. On March 2012, the LEL loan was issued with the execution clause succeeded to the instant payment order and on May 9, 2012, and was issued with the execution title of the instant payment order and issued with the Suwon District Court 2012TBT No. 20125 with the Defendant and the third debtor as the Defendant and the third debtor as the Defendant and seven others (hereinafter “instant claim seizure and collection order”). The instant seizure and collection order was served to the third debtor at that time, and was served to the Defendant on June 29, 2012.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 6, the purport of whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff filed the lawsuit of this case for the extension of extinctive prescription of the claim established by the payment order of this case.

3. Ex officio determination as to the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit

A. Since a final and conclusive judgment in favor of the party has res judicata effect, the party against whom the final and conclusive judgment in favor of the other party in the previous suit has been rendered shall again win the judgment.