1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The Defendant’s KRW 46,221,477 and KRW 26,047,795 among the Plaintiff’s KRW 46,221,47 and the Plaintiff’s KRW 14 September 14, 2015.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant did not pay each credit card payment on May 2, 2000, while being used with each credit card from the foreign exchange bank on November 30, 2001, and each credit card from the national card on November 30, 2001.

(hereinafter “instant claims”). B.

The defendant filed an application for individual rehabilitation with the Chuncheon District Court 2007 Ma2174 and decided to commence individual rehabilitation on September 28, 2007, but the decision was subsequently rendered on November 16, 2010 and became final and conclusive around that time.

The claims of this case are recorded in the list of individual rehabilitation creditors prepared in the above individual rehabilitation procedure.

C. On June 21, 2013, the Plaintiff acquired the instant claims from a foreign exchange bank on June 28, 2013, and notified the Defendant of the assignment of claims at that time.

The amount of claims on a national card as of September 13, 2015 is KRW 28,887,940 (i.e., principal KRW 20,792,117 interest KRW 8,095,823). The amount of claims on a foreign exchange bank is KRW 17,333,537 (= Principal KRW 5,255,678 interest KRW 12,07,859). The interest rate for delay under the Plaintiff’s internal regulations is KRW 17% per annum.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 6, the purport of whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 46,221,477 and the total amount of KRW 26,047,795 per annum from September 14, 2015 to the date of full payment.

B. Decision 1 on the Defendant’s defense 1) The summary of the Defendant’s assertion was as follows: (a) the extinctive prescription of the instant claims was completed in around 201 after five years from the date of delinquency, 2006; (b) around 201; (c) the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter “Rehabilitation Act”).

Articles 32 subparag. 3 and 589(2) provide that the interruption of prescription shall be effective against the submission of the list of individual rehabilitation creditors, and the interruption of prescription resulting therefrom shall be effective while the individual rehabilitation procedure is in progress, except in extenuating circumstances.