1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

3. The judgment of the court of first instance is rendered in accordance with Paragraph (1) of this Article.

1. On August 29, 2000, the Defendant borrowed KRW 1,000,000 from Daejeon Mutual Savings Bank (Seoul Mutual Savings Bank (Seoul Mutual Savings Bank: Chungcheong Bank Co., Ltd.: hereinafter “ Daejeon Savings Bank”).

On September 5, 2011, pursuant to Article 14(2) of the Act on the Structural Improvement of the Financial Industry, the Financial Services Commission decided to transfer all of the assets and liabilities, including the claims for loans to the Defendant of the Daejeon Savings Bank (hereinafter “instant claims”) to the Plaintiff. On September 6, 2011, the administrator of the Daejeon Savings Bank and the Plaintiff publicly announced the said decision on the transfer of contracts in a daily newspaper on September 6, 201.

As of July 19, 2016, the remaining principal of the instant claim is KRW 457,00,000, and overdue interest and delay damages incurred until that time shall be KRW 379,074.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of finding the cause of the claim, the instant claim against the Defendant of the Daejeon Savings Bank against the Defendant was determined by the Financial Services Commission pursuant to Article 14-2 of the aforementioned Act on September 5, 201, and the Plaintiff succeeded to it pursuant to the requirements for setting up against the transfer of designated claims pursuant to Article 450 of the Civil Act as of September 6, 201, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the annual rate of 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, as the Plaintiff seeks against the remaining principal and interest of the instant claim (= KRW 457,000, KRW 379,074) and the principal and interest of KRW 457,00,00, among them, from November 11, 2016 to the date of full payment.

3. The defendant's defense

A. Although the Defendant’s defense of the extinction of prescription expired, it is apparent that the Defendant’s final repayment date of August 31, 201 did not conflict with each other, and it was filed on August 30, 2016, which was five years after the instant lawsuit was filed. As such, it is apparent in the record that the Defendant’s final repayment date of August 31, 201 was filed.