The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining in light of the relevant legal principles and records as to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles as to the acceptance of the claim as grounds for interruption of extinctive prescription, the lower court, based on its stated reasoning, is justifiable to have rejected the Plaintiff’s defense as to the interruption of extinctive prescription, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the interruption of extinctive prescription period, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misapprehending the legal principles as to the acceptance of the claim, and by misapprehending the legal principles on the interruption of extinctive prescription, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. As to the allegation of interruption of extinctive prescription due to the peremptory notice, this part of the ground of appeal is first asserted in the final appeal and cannot be a legitimate ground of appeal.

3. Examining the assertion of deviation from the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence as to the waiver of extinctive prescription benefits in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the court below is just in holding that the defendant cannot be deemed to have expressed his intent to waive extinctive prescription solely on the ground that the defendant raised the defense of extinctive prescription only at the court below of this case. In so doing, contrary

4. Examining the record in light of the legal principles as to abuse of rights, etc., the court below is just in holding that the defendant's assertion for the completion of extinctive prescription is against the principle of good faith or cannot be viewed as an abuse of rights, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.