1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 67,978,860 and KRW 32,684,429 among them, 17% per annum from February 24, 2015 to the date of full payment.

In full view of the purport of the entire arguments in the statements in Gap evidence 3, Gap evidence 4, Gap evidence 5-2, 3, 6, and Gap evidence 9, the facts in the changed reasons for the claim can be acknowledged. The entries in Eul evidence 1 and Eul evidence 5 alone are insufficient to reverse it, and there is no other counter-proof, so the defendant is liable to pay to the plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 17% per annum from February 24, 2015 to the day of full payment.

The defendant defense that the above obligation had expired, but in full view of the whole purport of the arguments in Gap evidence and evidence Nos. 7 and 8, the defendant's defense that the defendant filed a lawsuit against the defendant before the National Bank transferred the above obligation to the plaintiff and rendered a judgment in favor of the defendant on May 3, 2005 (Seoul Northern District Court Decision 2004Ra39372 delivered on April 15, 2005). The facts that the credit card company filed a lawsuit against the defendant for the claim for the use of credit card before the transfer of the above obligation to the plaintiff and the judgment in favor of the defendant was confirmed on August 15, 2006 (Seoul Northern District Court Decision 2006Da36364 delivered on July 19, 2006). The plaintiff's above claim for the use of credit card can not be acknowledged for 10 years after the lapse of the extinctive prescription period, since the above claim had been interrupted by the judgment under Article 165 (1) of the Civil Act.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.