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. The reasons for this case, such as the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance, are as follows, and the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows, except for the determination as to the allegations added by the plaintiff in the court of first instance or in the trial. As such, this shall be cited by the main sentence of Article 420

In addition, in the first instance court’s 6th 5th 5th eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e. e.).

B. On January 27, 2016, the Plaintiff asserts that the period of extinctive prescription was interrupted by the Defendant’s acceptance of the instant obligation for construction cost. However, the Plaintiff’s assertion is insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendant approved the Defendant’s obligation, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit. 2) The Plaintiff asserted that the period of extinctive prescription was interrupted since the Defendant received construction cost equivalent to the amount indicated in the instant confirmation from the Urban Farm Unit Construction after the preparation of the certificate of subrogation payment.

However, there is no evidence to prove the above facts of the plaintiff's assertion, and the above reasons alleged by the plaintiff cannot be viewed as grounds for suspending extinctive prescription under the Civil Act. Thus, the plaintiff's assertion cannot be accepted.

2...