The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

In light of the fact that a claim upon the assignment of a claim does not lose its identity and is transferred from the transferor to the assignee, and such legal doctrine is the same even if it fails to satisfy the requirements for setting up against the assignment of claim, and that the assignee of the claim who has filed a judicial claim against the debtor cannot be deemed as "the person who was locked on his/her right", even if the transferee of the claim cannot set up against the debtor because he/she failed to satisfy the requirements for setting up against the obligor,

(See Supreme Court Decision 2005Da41818 delivered on November 10, 2005). The court below's acceptance of the plaintiff's assertion that the extinctive prescription has been interrupted upon the application for the payment order of this case is justifiable under the above legal principles. In so doing, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the legitimate requirements for the request for payment order or the judicial claim

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.