1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part of the claim for acquisition money from Samsung Life Insurance Co., Ltd., as well as KRW 14,907,171 and the balance.

1. The quoted part

(a) Indication of claims: To state the reasons for claims in the annexed Form except the following rejections:

(However, ‘creditor' is considered as ‘Plaintiff', and ‘debtor' as ‘Defendant').

Grounds: Judgment by public notice (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. The final and conclusive judgment of rejection shall also take effect on the successors subsequent to the closure of pleadings, other than the parties (Article 218(1) of the Civil Procedure Act). The transferee of a judgment ordering monetary payment after the closure of pleadings also constitutes the above successors.

However, since a final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party has res judicata effect, in cases where a party who has received a final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party files a lawsuit again against the other party to the lawsuit identical to the previous suit in which a final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party to the lawsuit in favor of one party to the lawsuit, unless it is obvious that the ten-year lapse period of extinctive prescription

In full view of the purport of the argument in Gap evidence No. 5 and the purport of the argument in this case, if the plaintiff acquired from Samsung Life Insurance Co., Ltd., the part of the claim for the loan (the total of KRW 14,907,171 and interest KRW 5,745,697, the total of KRW 20,652,868) against the defendant, the judgment in favor of Samsung Life Insurance Co., Ltd. can be recognized as having become final and conclusive on July 30, 2009, by filing a lawsuit against the defendant for the loan claim No. 2008Gapo312058, the Seoul Central District Court Decision No. 20058, which became final and conclusive on July 30, 2009. As such, it cannot be deemed that the ten-year lapse of the statute of limitations