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 reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is examined as follows. Thus, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

On the two pages of the judgment of the first instance court, the following four shall be followed by "from November 2, 2005 to December 13, 201".

The following shall be added between the last two pages of the judgment of the first instance and the next two:

“C. The Defendant filed an application against the Plaintiff for an order to pay the principal and interest of interest of unpaid loans with the Incheon District Court Branch Branch No. 2013 tea2426, Jun. 25, 2013, the Defendant issued a payment order stating that “the Plaintiff shall jointly and severally with the Defendant 9,420,655 won and the amount of KRW 4,147,145 shall be paid to the Defendant at the rate of 19% per annum from June 7, 2013 to the date of full payment,” and the said payment order became final and conclusive around October 29, 2013.” On the two pages of the first instance judgment, “3 evidence” of the last sentence shall be written with “7 evidence”.

In 3 pages 4 of the decision of the first instance court, "which is entirely different from the debt of a loan" shall be applied "which is different from the debt of a loan in terms of the amount of the loan, the period of the loan, the interest rate, the establishment of security, etc.".

The 3th to 20th of the first instance judgment shall be followed by the following:

D. The Plaintiff asserts that the statute of limitations has expired on July 9, 2006, when five years have elapsed from July 10, 2001 when the said loan was due, and that the statute of limitations expired on July 9, 2006. As recognized earlier, the statute of limitations has been interrupted during the period from November 2, 2005 to December 13, 201 when the said loan was repaid by B. However, the five-year statute of limitations has not yet expired, and the Plaintiff’s above assertion has no grounds.”

2. Accordingly, the judgment of the first instance is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.