1. The Plaintiff:

A. As to Defendant A Co., Ltd., the amount of KRW 1,047,521,683 and KRW 209,02,720.

1. Indication of claim;

A. The subsidiary mutual savings and finance company established a monetary loan agreement with Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant A”) on the terms indicated below.

on September 12, 1996 (hereinafter “instant loan”) 50,000,000 won per annum 22% per annum, 22% per annum, F, G on June 30, 1997, 22% per annum, 197, i.e., joint and several surety interest rate for delayed loan payments (hereinafter “the instant loan”);

B. On June 28, 199, the subsidiary mutual savings and finance company transferred each of the principal and interest of Defendant A to the Plaintiff, and at that time notified Defendant A of the assignment of the above obligation.

The balance of each of the above loans as of August 6, 2004 is KRW 1,011,020,211 in the case of the loans of this case (the principal of KRW 209,022,720) and KRW 36,501,472 in the case of loans of June 30, 1997 (interest).

C. Meanwhile, the Deceased died on March 31, 2013. At the time, the Defendant (Appointed Party) B (spouse) and the appointed party D and E (child) reported qualified acceptance, and the father of the Incheon District Court’s Branch Branch Branch of the Incheon District Court reported qualified acceptance.

7.5. The decision to accept the above qualified acceptance report was made

(2013 Rayman409)

Therefore, Defendant A is liable to pay to the Plaintiff the principal and interest of each of the above loans (1,01,020,211 won, 36,501,472 won) and damages for delay on the principal and interest of the loans, and the Defendant B and the appointed parties are jointly and severally liable with Defendant A to pay the principal and interest of the instant loans and damages for delay on the principal and interest of the loans in proportion to their respective inheritance shares within the scope of inherited property received from the Deceased.

(1) The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant A, the deceased, etc. to claim the payment of each of the above loans and rendered a favorable judgment on June 16, 2005 and the above judgment became final and conclusive. The lawsuit of this case is for the interruption of extinctive prescription of the judgment claim). 2. Judgment without merit based on recognition (Articles 208(3)1 and 257 of the Civil Procedure Act)