beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
1. We examine the judgment on the cause of the claim, the absence of any dispute, and the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 as a whole, and the entire arguments, the defendant joined the Industrial Bank of Korea (the name after the change: IBK Bank) as a credit card member, and used credit card service. The defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the credit card payment obligation as to the credit card payment obligation as to the above credit card. The defendant delayed the payment of KRW 1,645,829 from August 16, 201 to the 1,645,829, and the age, 4 loans and 4 loans (the first loans: the trade name after the change) are limited to the Industrial Bank of Korea as of September 30, 2011; U&S loans are from the 4th loans and the plaintiff on May 1, 2016 from U&S Co., Ltd. to the defendant on the credit card payment obligation to the defendant, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is liable to pay the above credit card payment to the plaintiff.
2. The defendant's defense is a defense that the plaintiff's credit card payment claim against the defendant against the defendant has expired as a commercial claim. Thus, the plaintiff's credit card payment claim against the defendant as a merchant is a commercial claim subject to the five-year statute of limitations pursuant to Article 64 of the Commercial Act, and the statute of limitations proceeds from the time when the plaintiff can exercise his/her right (Article 166 (1) of the Civil Act). The defendant's credit card payment claim against the defendant is a commercial claim subject to the five-year statute of limitations pursuant to Article 64 of the Commercial Act. The defendant's credit card payment claim against the defendant is a case where the plaintiff can exercise his/her right on August 16, 2010 when the defendant delayed payment of the above credit card payment. The fact that the plaintiff filed an application for payment order against the defendant on October 25, 20
As such, the defendant's above defense is reasonable.
As to this, the plaintiff is against each other.