1. The Defendant’s KRW 29,385,258 and KRW 28,408,218 among the Plaintiff’s KRW 20% per annum from June 21, 200 to July 1, 2004.

1. The allegations and judgment of the parties

(a)as shown in the reasons for the attachment of the claim;

(However, ‘creditor' is considered as ‘Plaintiff' and ‘debtor' as ‘Defendant'). 【Based on recognition' / Each entry of evidence Nos. 1 through 5 and the purport of the whole pleadings.

B. 1) The Defendant asserts that the extinctive prescription period of the claim of this case had already been expired. However, in light of the overall purport of the arguments in the evidence No. 5, the Defendant’s argument that the extinctive prescription period of the claim of this case had already been expired since it is apparent in the record that the claim of this case was filed on July 29, 2006. The judgment in favor of the Plaintiff was rendered on June 9, 2006 (see, e.g., judgment No. 5-1), and this judgment became final and conclusive on July 29, 2006. The Defendant’s assertion that the extinctive prescription period has expired since the fact that the claim of this case was filed on July 14, 2006, which was 10 years after the lapse of 10, was not known to the Defendant, but it is difficult to believe that the Defendant asserted to the effect that he was not aware of the contents of the previous lawsuit, but in light of the fact that the Defendant asserted against the Defendant in the previous suit.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Da61557 Decided October 28, 2010, etc.). 2. Conclusion, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the money stated in the Disposition No. 1.