1. Within the scope of inherited property from K, jointly and severally with L to the Plaintiff:

A. Defendant A shall pay KRW 9,470,783 and any of them.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the arguments stated in Gap evidence 1 and 2, since the Credit Guarantee Fund filed a lawsuit of indemnity amount of 206Da50538, Jeonju District Court with L and the defendants as shown in the separate sheet, and the amount of 17% per annum from November 16, 1993 to December 13, 1996; 25% per annum from the next day to December 17, 196; 30.3% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment; 470,783 won; 9,194 won per annum from the next day to the date of the above claim; 30.3% per annum from the following day to the date of the above claim; 470,198, 194 won; 30.1.6% per annum from the above amount to the plaintiff; 196.3% per annum and 25% per annum; 196.15% per annum from the above amount to the defendant 2, 197.385 won per annum and 25.38.5 won.

2. As to this, Defendant A, C, D, E, F, and I asserts that the claim acquired by the Plaintiff has expired by prescription.

However, the extinctive prescription of a claim established by a judgment is ten years (Article 165(1) of the Civil Act), and the fact that the judgment in the Jeonju District Court 2006Kadan5038 case became final and conclusive on July 21, 2007 is as seen earlier, and it is apparent in the record that the Plaintiff applied for the instant payment order on June 29, 2017, which was 10 years after the lapse of 10 years thereafter, and thus, the extinctive prescription of the claim that the Plaintiff acquired was interrupted.

Therefore, Defendant A, C, D, E, F, and I’s arguments are without merit.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is justified.