1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant's successor shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's successor shall be revoked.

1. On May 4, 2005, E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) entered into a credit transaction agreement with the Plaintiff on May 4, 2005, with the loan 150,000,000 won, and with the maturity on May 4, 2008, deposited the loan in the Plaintiff’s account in the Plaintiff’s name. The maturity was extended on May 3, 2010, and the repayment was extended every year on May 4, 2010, and the so-called substitution, which is treated as a repayment of an existing debt only in writing by the financial institution and the debtor, without the actual receipt of new funds, is substantially limited to the extension of the maturity period for the existing debt, and the existing debt continues to remain with the maintenance of the identity of the existing debt if the repayment was made in substitution.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Da55222, 55239, Nov. 13, 2001). For B, a credit transaction agreement was concluded on May 4, 201 for a loan of KRW 150,000,000 and due date.

E entered into a credit transaction agreement with the Plaintiff on December 31, 2009 on loans 112,00,000,000, and the maturity date on December 31, 2014, and deposited the above loans into the Plaintiff’s account in the Plaintiff’s name.

On March 27, 2012, the Plaintiff received loans from E as of March 27, 2012 are as follows:

On December 31, 2014, 200, 12,000,000, 3,797, and 2902 " May 4, 2010, 2010, 4. 150,000,000, 3,797, and 2902, "150,000,000, 150,000,000,000, 262,000,880,70,000,000, 262,002,00,000,0026,002,00,000,0026,000,000,000,000 financial industry, 14,67, 967, and 2011.21, 201.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant agreement” and the claim and obligation arising therefrom are referred to as “instant claim and obligation”). [Grounds for recognition] There is no dispute, Eul’s evidence 1-1-16, and Eul’s evidence 7-1-3.