1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 30,080,369 and KRW 23,677,204 per annum from April 1, 2005 to the day of full payment.

1. The facts of the reasons for the attachment of the judgment as to the reasons for the claim do not conflict between the parties, or can be recognized by the entry of the evidence No. A No. 1.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff, the assignee of each of the instant claims, 30,080,369 won in total, and 23,67,204 won in total, with 17% interest rate per annum from April 1, 2005 to the date of full payment.

2. As to the Defendant’s defense, the Defendant asserts that each of the claims of this case was extinguished by the statute of limitations, so the fact that the statute of limitations has already been interrupted by a prior judgment rendered on January 3, 2007 (Seoul Southern District Court 2006Kadan83929) is either a dispute between the parties, or is obvious to this court, and that the claim for which a judgment became final and conclusive pursuant to Article 165(1) of the Civil Act is subject to the ten-year statute of limitations, and it is apparent in the record that the Plaintiff filed an application for the instant payment order on June 29, 2016, which was ten years after the lapse of the ten-year period from the time the prior judgment became final and conclusive. Accordingly, the Defendant’s re-appeal pointing out the interruption of prescription has merit

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.