1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 1, 1995, upon the Defendant’s request, the Plaintiff made an endorsement on the issuer, the Defendant, the face value of KRW 20 million, the due date on May 12, 1995, the payment date on the Nonghyup City, the Agricultural Cooperative Federation at the place of payment, and the Promissory Notes at the Sung-si Branch (hereinafter “instant Promissory Notes”) and paid money to C on January 16, 1995.

B. However, on May 12, 1995, the Promissory Notes of this case were refused to be paid on the grounds of non-transaction. The Plaintiff paid the Promissory Notes to C and recovered the Promissory Notes in accordance with C’s filing of a lawsuit against the Plaintiff, who is an endorser.

C. Accordingly, on May 12, 1995, the Defendant prepared a loan certificate stating that the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 23 million without setting the period for repayment to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”).

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, it appears that the Plaintiff, as an endorser, recovered the Promissory Notes in response to C’s small district, and accordingly, it is recognized that the Defendant prepared and issued the instant loan certificate with the intent to pay the Plaintiff KRW 23 million. Therefore, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff and the Defendant constituted a quasi-loan for consumption with respect to KRW 23 million.

Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay the remainder of the loan 18 million won and damages for delay to the Plaintiff, except for the remainder of the loan that is paid by the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff.

B. The defendant's defense of the extinctive prescription and the defense against the waiver of the benefit of extinctive prescription are defenses that the extinctive prescription of the borrowed money has expired. The plaintiff's benefit of the extinctive prescription by accepting part of the debt by the defendant's repayment of the debt amounting to KRW 3 million on June 1, 2007 and KRW 2 million on June 19, 2007.