The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the ground of appeal No. 2, “the date on which the victim becomes aware of the damage and the perpetrator” under Article 766(1) of the Civil Act, which is the starting point of calculating the short-term extinctive prescription of the claim for damages due to a tort, means the time when the victim, etc. reasonably and specifically, recognized the requisite facts of the tort, such as the occurrence of the damage, the existence of an illegal harmful act, and proximate causal relation between the harmful act and the occurrence of the damage. Whether the victim, etc. deemed to have actually and specifically recognized the requisite facts of the tort should be reasonably acknowledged in consideration of

(2) According to the reasoning of the lower judgment and the record, the Plaintiff asserted the illegality of each currency option contract of this case, which was concluded with the Defendant on July 29, 2009, based on the reasoning of the lower judgment and the record: (a) the Plaintiff commenced losses under the instant currency option contract from November 28, 2007, due to the increase of the original/N exchange rate; (b) the company that concluded the currency option contract became a social problem due to the increase of exchange rates; (c) the Financial Supervisory Commission investigated whether a bank’s illegal act related to the currency option contract was committed; and (d) the Plaintiff prepared and delivered explanatory documents upon the Defendant’s request on September 8, 2008; and (e) B, the Plaintiff’s employee, as the Plaintiff’s employee, claimed the illegality of each currency option contract of this case, which was concluded with the Defendant on July 29, 2009; and (e) the instant lawsuit was instituted on February 18, 2013.

Examining these facts in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff, at the latest at the end of July 2009, recognized the Defendant’s tort regarding the instant first currency option contract. As such, the extinctive prescription of the Plaintiff’s damage claim proceeds from that time, and the instant lawsuit is thereafter filed.