1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. Fact 1) The Saemaul Savings Depository (hereinafter referred to as the “Sule Savings Depository”)

(2) On September 28, 2001, the Defendant granted a loan of KRW 180,000,000 to the Defendant for a period fixed on September 28, 2006 (hereinafter “instant loan”).

(2) On April 24, 2006, the Defendant did not pay the interest of the instant loan and lost the benefit of time, and the community credit cooperatives received 137,047,070 won from the auction procedure for the security as dividends and appropriated it to repay the principal of the instant loan. The Defendant paid an additional repayment until May 9, 2006.

3) On June 28, 2013, community credit cooperatives transferred to the Plaintiff the principal of the instant loan claim amounting to KRW 41,665,621 and interest thereon, and notified the Defendant of the said transfer on June 23, 2014. (iv) The sum of the principal and interest of the instant loan amount calculated as of July 10, 2017 is KRW 173,745,547.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Entry of Gap 1 to 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay the above KRW 173,745,547 and delay damages for the principal amount of KRW 41,665,621 to the plaintiff.

2. Judgment on the defendant's defense

A. The Defendant asserted that the instant loans were extinguished by the statute of limitations after five years have elapsed since the due date for payment with commercial claims. Accordingly, the Plaintiff asserted that on July 10, 2013, the period of prescription was interrupted by the Defendant’s repayment of KRW 624,980, which is a part of the instant loans, or that the Defendant waived the benefit of extinctive prescription, and the Plaintiff applied for the payment order before five years have elapsed since the said waiver.

B. The fact that the instant loan was repaid by May 9, 2006 was seen earlier. As such, the extinctive prescription of the instant loan claim from the above point of time had run, and it is evident that the Plaintiff applied for a payment order against the Defendant on July 17, 2017 when five years elapsed thereafter, and thus, the instant loan claim.