1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for adding the following determination as to the defendant’s argument added in the court of first instance as to this case, and therefore, it shall be cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The defendant's argument on the defendant's assertion argues that even if the claim of this case against the plaintiff against the defendant was not extinguished by the defendant's repayment, it has already been extinguished due to the completion of prescription.

In light of the above legal principles, claims from both parties as well as claims arising from commercial activities are commercial claims to which the five-year extinctive prescription period under Article 64 of the Commercial Act applies only to one of the parties. Such commercial activities include not only the basic commercial activities falling under any subparagraph of Article 46 of the Commercial Act, but also ancillary commercial activities which merchants conduct for their business (see Supreme Court Decision 98Da23195, May 12, 2000). It is presumed that the acts of merchants are conducted for their business (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Da54378, Dec. 11, 2008). In light of the above legal principles, the Defendant, a stock company under the Commercial Act, received the instant money from the Plaintiff, is merely an act done by the merchants for their business or at least by the merchants as an act of the merchants, and thus, such claims are subject to the extinctive prescription period of 10 years under Article 64 of the Commercial Act (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Da54378, Dec. 27, 2015).