1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Facts of recognition

The Defendant, Co., Ltd., Ltd., E, C, D, and the Defendant issued to the Plaintiff a promissory note as stated on December 4, 2008, the date of issuance, April 30, 2009 (hereinafter “instant promissory note”) at the face value of KRW 100 million, the payee, the issuer E, C, D, the Defendant, the Defendant, the Defendant, and the Gunpo-si in Gyeonggi-do, the issue date, and April 30, 2009, and on December 4, 2008, a notary public prepared a promissory note No. 531, 208, and issued it to the Plaintiff.

[Grounds for recognition] In light of the facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, and the facts of the above recognition as to the ground of claim purport of the whole pleadings, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the amount of 100,000,000 won and damages for delay together with C and D, barring any special circumstance.

The Defendant’s assertion on the Defendant’s defense that the claim of the Promissory Notes in this case was extinguished by three-year prescription.

Judgment

The claim on a bill against the issuer of a promissory note is complete unless it is exercised for three years from the maturity date (Articles 77(1)8 and 70(1) of the Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes Act), and the claim on a promissory note cannot be deemed as a claim established by a promissory note having the same effect as the judgment that has the same effect as the judgment. This cannot be deemed as a claim under Article 165(2) of the Civil Act with the expiration date of ten years.

(See Supreme Court Decision 92Da169 delivered on April 14, 1992, etc.). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, it is apparent in the record that the instant lawsuit was filed on January 29, 2019, which was three years after the date of payment of the instant promissory note, and thus, the instant promissory note claim was already extinguished upon the completion of the statute of limitations.

Therefore, the defendant's defense is justified.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.