1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. The Plaintiff, on April 22, 2009, lent a loan of KRW 30 million to the Defendant, one’s own partner, (hereinafter “instant loan”) on April 22, 2009, has no dispute between the parties. Therefore, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff a loan of KRW 30 million and damages for delay, barring any special circumstance.

2. Determination on the statute of limitations defense

A. The Defendant’s assertion is limited to the extinctive prescription period, and 1) at the time of lending the instant loan, and as a part-time lecturer and assistant professor at QU, the Defendant operated C as an individual entrepreneur. The Defendant borrowed the instant loan from the Plaintiff in order to guarantee exclusive business rights in connection with the operation of the pertinent center, and deposit money to the Korea RU.S.. Therefore, the instant loan constitutes a commercial activity. Since the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit after the lapse of 5 years from the lending date, the statute of limitations for the loan claims expired. 2) The Defendant’s claim constitutes a commercial claim subject to the five-year extinctive prescription period under Article 64 of the Commercial Act for both parties as well as the claim arising from the act that constitutes a commercial activity. In addition, the commercial activity includes not only the basic commercial activity falling under each subparagraph of Article 46 of the Commercial Act, but also auxiliary commercial activity that a merchant runs for business purposes (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Da10548, Mar. 11, 2010).