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. Basic facts

A. The Defendant, around 2001 to 2003, was liable for a credit card payment liability and a credit card loan loan obligation to the EL branch card Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “EL branch card”) and Samsung Card Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Tsung card”).

As of March 31, 2005, the sum of principal and interest of the above obligation is KRW 24,571,00 (= Principal KRW 17,424,897) and interest KRW 7,146,151).

B. On May 13, 2005, the Plaintiff received each of the above claims against the Defendant from EL branch cards and Samsung branch cards. On June 16, 2005, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant as the assignee of the above claims in accordance with special cases concerning the requirements for setting up against the assignment of claims under Article 7(1) of the Asset-Backed Securitization Act.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 7 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts in determining the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the sum total of KRW 24,571,048 and delay damages for the principal amount of KRW 17,424,897, except in extenuating circumstances.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The defendant's defense of the extinction of prescription shall be a defense that the above claim of the transfer money had already expired by prescription.

Pursuant to Article 5(2) and (1) and Article 47(1) and (2) of the Commercial Act, claims arising from an act falling under a commercial activity are commercial claims to which the five-year extinctive prescription period under Article 64 of the Commercial Act applies only to one of the parties. In this case, a company shall be deemed a merchant even if it does not engage in a commercial activity, and the act performed by a merchant for his/her business purposes is presumed to be a commercial activity, and the act performed by a merchant is presumed to have been conducted for his/her business purposes. Thus, the act performed by the company is presumed to have been conducted for its business, and the act performed by the company for his/her business purposes is deemed to have been considered as a commercial activity (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da7863, May 27, 200