The plaintiff's respective claims against the defendants are dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Plaintiff’s assertion

The Plaintiff asserted that each obligation of August 1, 2019, written by the Debt Certification Board (Attached Form) against the Defendants was completed at a five-year commercial extinctive prescription before the instant lawsuit as follows, and that there was no confirmation of the absence thereof.

The judgment on June 12, 2007, June 12, 2002, 2007, Defendant Korea Asset Management Corporation (hereinafter “Defendant Corporation”) on June 12, 2007, as of the date the prescription period commenced by the creditor, is expired. The judgment on June 12, 2007, on June 12, 2002

A. In full view of the purport of the argument in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2 as to the claim of Defendant Corporation, D Limited Company, the transferor of the claim of this case, filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff against the Plaintiff (Yanpo-si District Court Decision 2006Gapo-si7587), and the judgment became final and conclusive around July 27, 2006. Since the judgment was rendered on July 27, 2006, the above limited company filed an application for a payment order against the Plaintiff seeking the extension of the statute of limitations on the claim of this case (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2016Da162626), and an application for a payment order against the said limited company (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2016Da1626), and the payment order was suspended on October 6, 2016. Accordingly, the defense against Defendant Corporation that points out the statute of limitations is reasonable, and the Plaintiff’s allegation in this part of the statute of limitations is

B. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire pleadings in Eul evidence Nos. 3, 4, 6, and 8 (including branch numbers) as to the defendant company's claims, the defendant company filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff for payment of part of the claim of this case (the Seopo District Court of Seopopo City 201Gapo City 2011Gapo City 5318), and the judgment for the claimant was rendered on February 23, 2012 and the above judgment became final and conclusive around that time, Eul, the transferor of the claim of this case, as to the remainder of the claim of this case, filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff (the Seoul Central District Court 201Gapo2483282), and March 2012.