1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 21,133,165 and shall pay to the plaintiff the full amount from September 1, 2017.

1. The following facts can be acknowledged in full view of the entries in Gap's evidence Nos. 1 and 5 and the purport of the entire pleadings as a result of the extension of the financial transaction information of C Co., Ltd.

C Co., Ltd. issued a credit card under the Defendant’s name on May 6, 201, and the Defendant received the said credit card directly on May 17, 2011.

B. The Defendant, using the credit card issued under the name of the Defendant, including the above credit card, paid the price of goods or received a long-term card loan (credit card loan) from May 17, 201 to March 13, 2017. From February 25, 2017, the Defendant delayed payment of the price of the credit card from around February 25, 2017.

C. On May 1, 2017, C Co., Ltd. transferred the credit card user price claim and other claims incidental thereto to D Co., Ltd., and on May 1, 2017, issued a notice of assignment to the Defendant by content-certified mail.

D A. On September 26, 2017, a corporation entrusted the Plaintiff with the right to notify the assignment of credit cards to the Defendant while transferring the above credit card user’s claim against the Defendant and its ancillary claims, and on October 19, 2017, the Plaintiff sent the notice of the assignment of credit to the Defendant by content-certified mail.

E. As of August 31, 2017, around the time when the Plaintiff acquired the instant credit card usage claim, the Defendant’s overdue credit card usage amount of KRW 21,133,165, and around that time, the overdue interest rate of C Co., Ltd. against an individual member with overdue interest rate of at least 90 days is 24.5%.

2. According to the above facts of determination, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff who acquired the credit card user fee claim KRW 21,133,165 as well as damages for delay calculated by the rate of 24.5% per annum from September 1, 2017 to the date of full payment, which is the agreement that the Plaintiff seeks, as a result of the due date.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted on the ground of its reasoning, and the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair on the ground of its conclusion, so it is revoked, and it is ordered to order the payment of the above money.