1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. On August 22, 2002, the defendant filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff, D, and Dong Branch of Seoul District Court 2001Kahap7450, and filed a claim for loans on August 22, 2002. "The plaintiff, D, and E are gold 142,809,862 won to each of the defendant, and the plaintiff, D are paid with 25% interest per annum from September 2, 2001 to the day of full payment, and E are paid with 25% interest per annum from September 3, 2001 to the day of full payment. The above judgment became final and conclusive on September 24, 2002. Thus, the plaintiff's main purport of the claim is that the compulsory execution against the plaintiff is not allowed by the defendant, and the compulsory execution against the plaintiff is not allowed by the defendant.

3. According to the evidence Nos. 1-1 to 2-5 of the evidence Nos. 1-2, the defendant, based on the executory exemplification of the judgment of this case by Jeju District Court 2009TT2484 on July 28, 2009, the plaintiff is the debtor, the national bank, the new bank, the Korea Exchange Bank, the Korea Exchange Bank and the Jeju Bank as the third debtor, and the third debtor, applying for a seizure and collection order against the debtor's deposit claim against the third debtor on July 29, 2009, and the seizure and collection order reaches the plaintiff as the debtor on August 17, 2009. Thus, the statute of limitations against the defendant's claim against the plaintiff was interrupted.

Therefore, the defendant's defense is reasonable, and this part of the plaintiff's defense is without merit.

B. The Plaintiff’s claim against the Plaintiff based on the instant judgment is the Defendant’s claim against the Plaintiff as to the amount loaned to the Plaintiff on November 14, 1991 by the agreement between August 9, 2008 and July 31, 2001 and KRW 142,809,862, and damages for delay.