1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. As to the Plaintiff KRW 1,987,277 and its KRW 1,175,125 among them, the Defendant shall on June 200.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 31, 200, Korea Mutual Savings Bank (hereinafter “Korea Mutual Savings Bank”) loaned KRW 1,500,000 to the Defendant on May 31, 200 (hereinafter “Korea Mutual Savings Bank”) (hereinafter “Korea Mutual Savings Bank”) and the delayed interest rate applied from June 23, 200 to the said one is 56.3% per annum.

In addition, on June 4, 200, Korea Savings Bank loaned KRW 1,000,000 to the Defendant (hereinafter “Second Loan”) and the rate of delay interest applied from June 24, 200 is 56.3% per annum.

B. The principal balance of each of the above loan claims against the Defendant of Korea Savings Bank (hereinafter “instant loan claims”) is KRW 1,987,227 in total (i.e., the balance of principal principal of the first loan and KRW 1,175,125 in total (i.e., KRW 812,102 in total).

C. On November 12, 2004, the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation was declared bankrupt by the Changwon District Court, and was appointed by the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation as a trustee in bankruptcy. On December 20, 2013, the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation transferred the instant loan claims against the Defendant to the Plaintiff, and notified the Defendant of the assignment of claims on March 11, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the above recognition, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated by the rate of 56.3% per annum from June 23, 2000 to the date of full payment of the principal amount of the instant loan claim, and from June 23, 2000 to the date of full payment of the principal amount of the first loan, 1,175,125 won, and from June 24, 2000 to the date of full payment of all the principal amount of the second loan.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified, and the judgment of the court of first instance which has different conclusions is unfair, so the court of first instance revokes the plaintiff's appeal and ordered the defendant to pay the above amount, and it is so decided as per Disposition.