1. The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed.

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

The plaintiff organized a number of 16 members of the fraternity on September 18, 2003, paid 30,000,000 won to the defendant B on the same day, and prepared a loan certificate with the defendant B as the principal debtor and the defendant C as the joint and several surety in order to secure this. On March 24, 2003, the number of the fraternity consisting of 18 members on March 24, 2003, and remitted 51,00,000 won to the defendant B on May 24, 2003, and then prepared a loan certificate consisting of the principal debtor and the defendant C as the joint and several surety.

Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the plaintiff paid a successful bid of KRW 30 million to the defendant B on September 18, 2002, and prepared a loan certificate to the defendant B and the defendant C who is a joint and several surety, and the plaintiff paid a successful bid of KRW 51,000,000 to the defendant B on January 23, 2003 and prepared a loan certificate to the defendant B and a joint and several surety.

As to the defendants' defenses that the above claim had expired by the statute of limitations, the above claim expired by the statute of limitations prior to the filing of the lawsuit in this case, since it is obvious that the plaintiff's lawsuit in this case was filed on September 26, 2014, which was 10 years after the lapse of 10 years from the plaintiff's lawsuit in this case. Thus, the above claim in this case expired by the statute of limitations prior to the filing of the lawsuit in this case.

Therefore, the defendants' defense is justified.

As to this, the Plaintiff asserts that since the number limit of each of the above loans ends on December 18, 2004, the lawsuit of this case was filed prior to the expiration of the extinctive prescription period, and that the above defendant was convicted of the guilty, the extinctive prescription was interrupted.

On December 18, 2004, which is the last day of the Plaintiff’s assertion number system, there is a lack to recognize only the statement of evidence No. 3.