1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasons for this case by the court of first instance are as follows: ① Then, the statement in the evidence No. 20, 21, and 33, which corresponds to the defendant's argument, and the testimony by the witness of the court of first instance is hard to believe; ② See the statement in the evidence No. 20, 21, and 33, which corresponds to the defendant's argument, and the testimony by the witness of the court of first instance, around September 2009, which is the 6th and the 7th that of the 7th in the judgment No. 17th in the court of first instance, “B is merely the defendant's statement before the court of first instance, which is the defendant's employee,” and ③ from the 7th to the 9th that of the 7th in the judgment of the court of first instance, the testimony by the witness of the court of first instance and the testimony by the witness of the court of second instance are as stated in the main sentence of Article 20 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for the defendant's new argument.

2. The defendant's additional assertion and judgment thereon

A. Considering that the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant had been able to build the instant commercial building as the instant loan, and that the Defendant reserved the enforcement of the instant right to collateral security at the request of G, the representative director of the Plaintiff Company, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the extinctive prescription expired constitutes an abuse

B. As seen earlier, it is difficult to view that the judgment G requested the Defendant to withhold the exercise of the instant right to collateral security around September 2008.

In addition, as seen earlier, the Plaintiff could newly construct the commercial building of this case with the instant loan, however, such circumstance alone is difficult to deem that the Plaintiff’s assertion on the completion of extinctive prescription constitutes an abuse of rights, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff’s assertion constitutes an abuse of rights

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case should be accepted on the grounds of its reasoning, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed because it is without merit.