1. The plaintiff's lawsuit against the defendant C shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's claims against the defendant A and B are all dismissed.

3...

1. Basic facts

A. On December 27, 1996, Defendant C borrowed money from the Savings Bank by Esvia Bank, and Defendant A and B jointly guaranteed Defendant C’s loans.

B. Defendant C received a decision to commence rehabilitation procedures from the Gwangju District Court on June 12, 2013, and the decision to authorize the rehabilitation plan was finalized on November 19, 2013. The savings bank participated in the rehabilitation procedure and reported the right to the creditor. However, the savings bank was excluded from the rehabilitation plan because it did not respond specifically to the objection asserting the expiration of the extinctive prescription period.

C. Around October 29, 2015, the Savings Bank Co., Ltd. transferred a loan claim against Defendant C to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of evidence of Nos. 1 to 10, purport of the whole pleadings

2. As seen earlier than the legitimacy of the lawsuit against Defendant C, the Savings Bank may participate in the rehabilitation procedure and report the claim. In light of the fact that, upon the commencement of the individual rehabilitation procedure, the period for objection against the claim listed in the list of rehabilitation creditors is set, the procedure for the claim inspection is in progress, the claim becomes in effect within the rehabilitation procedure, and the stability of the individual rehabilitation procedure and the purport of the final inspection judgment system, etc., it is reasonable to view that upon the commencement of the individual rehabilitation procedure, a separate performance lawsuit may not be filed against the claim belonging to the same subject matter as that listed in the list of creditors, and that the claim may be asserted by the final inspection judgment and its objection lawsuit within the individual rehabilitation procedure.

Therefore, the plaintiff's lawsuit against the defendant C does not have any interest or need to protect the rights.

3. As to the claim against Defendant A and B, the said Defendants asserted that the obligation of Defendant C’s loans, the primary debtor, was extinguished at least by the expiration of the extinctive prescription of at least ten years. However, the Plaintiff did not dispute this.

According to this, we examine.