1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Comprehensively taking account of Gap evidence No. 6’s evidence and the overall purport of the pleadings as to the cause of the claim, the defendant borrowed KRW 10 million from the new owner of the community credit cooperatives on March 9, 1995, and the plaintiff can be recognized as having taken over the above loan principal amount of KRW 7,689,200 against the defendant from the new owner of the community credit cooperatives on June 28, 2013. Thus, the defendant is liable to pay the above principal and delay damages to the plaintiff, barring any special circumstance.

2. According to the above evidence, it can be known that the period of extinctive prescription is five years as a claim arising from a commercial activity that a judgment financial institution conducted as to the Defendant’s defense of extinctive prescription (Article 64 of the Commercial Act) and the Defendant’s repayment period for the Defendant’s loans to the new holders of community credit cooperatives on February 21, 1998. The instant lawsuit is clearly recorded in the record on April 23, 2014, which was five years after the said payment period, and thus, the said debt expired.

As to this, the plaintiff re-appeals that the extinctive prescription was interrupted, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it, and eventually, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant is without merit.

3. Dismissal of the Plaintiff’s claim