1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The defendant is against the plaintiff's successor intervenor 3,080,792 won and 600.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Gwangju Bank lent to the Defendant the amount of KRW 30 million on April 9, 1996, and KRW 50 million on July 2, 1997, respectively, and entered into a credit card agreement with the Defendant on November 7, 1995.

B. On October 9, 200, Gwangju Bank filed a lawsuit against the defendant demanding the payment of the principal and interest of interest of loans as stated in paragraph (a) and the payable amount of credit card loans (No. 2000 Ghana District Court Decision 2000Da135120) on November 17, 200 and sentenced that "the defendant shall pay to the Gwangju Bank 2,564,281 won and 600,000 won whichever is 25% per annum from October 1, 200 to the day of full payment," and the above judgment became final and conclusive on December 28, 2000.

C. The claim against the Defendant, which became final and conclusive by the judgment stated in Paragraph (b), was transferred in sequence to the new M&A, the first mutual savings bank, the KB Savings Bank, the KB Savings Bank, and the Plaintiff’s succeeding Intervenor on June 11, 2014, and each of the above assignment claims was notified to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-2, Gap evidence 2-1, 2-2, Gap evidence 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor KRW 3,080,792 and KRW 600,000 among the claims that the Plaintiff succeeded to the claim, as sought by the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor, the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from June 14, 2009 to the day of full payment, which is the day following the day of delivery of the copy of the complaint, to the day of full payment.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant asserts to the effect that it is unreasonable for the Intervenor to claim that the Intervenor succeeded to the Plaintiff acquired the claim against the Defendant for the following reasons: (a) the Plaintiff’s default occurred in 198; and (b) around that time, the Plaintiff fully repaid the obligation to the Gwangju Bank; and (c) around 201

B. First of all, the defendant's assertion against the defendant of the Gwangju Bank.