1. As to KRW 32,481,526 and KRW 32,481,503 among the Plaintiff, the Defendant shall start from December 20, 2019 to December 31, 2019.

According to Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including additional numbers), the facts as shown in the separate sheet can be recognized. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 32,481,526 won and 32,481,503 won among them, which are the date of subrogation, 10% per annum from December 20, 2019 to December 31, 2019, and 7% per annum from the following day to March 10, 2020, which are clear that the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case is the date of delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case, and damages for delay calculated by 12% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment, barring any special circumstances.

On this issue, the Defendant asserted to the effect that it cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim of this case since the Defendant filed a debt settlement application with C institution and the procedure is in progress.

In light of the above, the C institution’s approval for debt settlement is merely a system that assists in the debtor’s economic recovery through debt settlement, such as extension of the repayment period, installment repayment, adjustment of interest rate, deferment of repayment period, and exemption from debt, etc. for debtors meeting certain requirements, such as the burden of excessive debt to various financial institutions, etc., and even if such approval was granted, it cannot be deemed as effective to block the plaintiff’s claim of this case.

In addition, it is necessary for the plaintiff to secure the executive title in preparation for the loss of the validity of the approval of debt settlement due to the reasons that the defendant's failure to implement the repayment plan.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is not accepted.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is decided as per Disposition by admitting it.