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. Basic facts

A. On March 23, 2015, the Defendant entered into a credit card subscription agreement with the Plaintiff, issued a credit card and traded credit cards, such as the purchase of goods and services. Furthermore, on November 25, 2016, the Defendant took over the Defendant’s Defendant’s obligation to the Plaintiff’s child B, and received a refund loan of KRW 9,200,000 from the Plaintiff to pay the principal amount.

B. Since then, the Defendant lost the benefit of time due to the delinquency in the repayment of the above credit card transaction price and the loans on exchange.

The sum of the principal of the above bonds in arrears as of June 15, 2017 (hereinafter “instant bonds”) KRW 8,891,400 and the interest or late payment charge is KRW 708,983 (=interest 677,898).

C. Meanwhile, after March 3, 2016, the overdue interest rate and the overdue interest rate on the loan at the time of arrears for at least three months after the Plaintiff’s credit card payment claim are 27.9% per annum.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. According to the above facts, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the agreed delay damages calculated at the rate of 27.9% per annum from June 16, 2017, to the date of full payment, as to the principal amount of KRW 8,891,400 and the late payment charge of KRW 708,983) and the principal amount of KRW 8,891,40, which is the day following the above basic date, to the date of full payment.

B. On this issue, the Defendant asserted that the Defendant was exempted from the obligation of this case against the Plaintiff since the Defendant was declared bankrupt and exempted from the immunity. Accordingly, according to the written evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the Defendant was granted a immunity decision on Nov. 6, 2007 (the court 2007, 20825) and the above decision became final and conclusive on Nov. 22, 2007. However, according to the above, the claim of this case occurred after the above immunity decision became final and conclusive, and thus, it cannot be said that the Defendant’s defense is without merit.