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. Basic facts

A. C on March 2, 2006, the Defendant lent 3.6 million won interest and delayed payment interest rate of 66% per annum, and due date of payment on March 2, 2007. D jointly and severally guaranteed the Defendant’s above loan obligation.

B. On April 28, 2016, C transferred the remainder of the loans or joint and several surety claims against the Defendant and D, KRW 1.57 million, and interest or delay damages thereon, to the Plaintiff, and notified the Defendant and D of the transfer on June 2, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of claim and the defendant's assertion

A. According to the facts found earlier, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the loan claim amounting to KRW 1570,000 and damages for delay, barring special circumstances.

B. Determination 1 on the Defendant’s argument that the Defendant repaid all the loan obligation, and even if the unpaid obligation remains, the extinctive prescription of C’s loan obligation or the Plaintiff’s loan obligation has already expired. 2) In full view of the following purport: (a) the Defendant and D have paid KRW 1.70,00 out of the loan amount for four months from the date of the above loan; and (b) the fact that the Plaintiff, who received the claim from C, urged D to pay the loan amount to the Plaintiff and paid the loan amount of KRW 1.70,000,000,000,000 to the Plaintiff by demanding D to pay the loan amount; and (c) in light of the above loan amount, its funds, Defendant and D’s repayment amount, etc., it seems that the above loan principal and interest claim still remains, notwithstanding the payment by the Defendant and D.

3. However, as seen earlier, the fact that the repayment period of the above loan claim was March 2, 2007 is the same, and it is apparent that the Plaintiff’s lawsuit in this case was filed on April 28, 2017, which was ten years after the lapse of the aforesaid ten years. Thus, even if the Defendant and D are all of the above money, the said money.