1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. According to the determination as to the cause of the claim, barring any special circumstance, the defendant, as the heir of B, sought only KRW 3,655,316, or the plaintiff, as the plaintiff, who is the transferee of the loan principal and interest, based on the inheritance shares (1/3), pursuant to the calculation of KRW 7,725,296 (23,175,889 x 1/3,000 x 1/3,000 x 3,655,316 won or KRW 3,65,313 among them.

(10,965,948 x 1/3) are liable to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 11.8% per annum, as requested by the Plaintiff, within the scope of the interest rate in arrears in the agreement.

On April 9, 2001, the Korea Housing and Commercial Bank Co., Ltd. ("Korea Housing and Commercial Bank") concluded a loan agreement with a motor vehicle consumer with B on April 9, 2001, and lent 15,400,000 won at the interest rate rate of 11.8% per annum of installment redemption, 9.9% per annum of lump-sum redemption, and 19% per annum of delay compensation.

B. On August 30, 2005, the National Bank transferred the above loan claims to the National Federation of Fisheries Cooperatives (hereinafter “instant claims”) and notified the above assignment of claims to B by content-certified mail on October 14, 2005, and reached the Defendant around that time.

C. On March 17, 2006, the National Federation of Fisheries Cooperatives transferred the above loan claims to the Plaintiff. On the same day, the National Federation notified the assignment of claims to B by content-certified mail and reached B around that time.

After that, B died in May 2007, and there are C, D, and Defendant A, their children.

E. Meanwhile, as of May 22, 2015, the sum of the principal and interest of the instant claim is KRW 23,175,889 (= Principal KRW 10,965,948 and damages for delay).

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

2. As to the defendant's defense of extinctive prescription

A. The Defendant asserts that the instant claim had expired by prescription.

In light of the above facts of recognition and the following circumstances: