1. On August 1, 2008, the Defendant shall apply to the real estate stated in the attached list to B, as a senior district court of Jung-gu on August 1, 2008.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. C filed a lawsuit against B in respect of the claim for the amount of the transfer income, and the judgment that “B shall pay C the amount calculated by the rate of 1% per annum from February 19, 2014 to the date of complete payment” became final and conclusive.

Seoul Central District Court (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2014Da517127 Decided October 18, 2014). (b)

C On April 19, 2018, a corporation transferred the above bonds to the Plaintiff and notified the transfer to B.

C. On August 1, 2008, the Defendant completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage on August 1, 2008, No. 5966, which was received on August 1, 2008, on the ground of a contract establishing a right to collateral security with the obligor B and the mortgagee as the Plaintiff.

At present, B is insolvent.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, purport of whole pleadings

2. According to the facts acknowledged prior to the determination, the date of the instant collective security agreement is August 1, 2008, and thus, it is apparent that the instant lawsuit was filed with the lapse of ten years thereafter.

On October 1, 2019, the defendant asserts that the effect of the interruption of extinctive prescription or the waiver of extinctive prescription interest has occurred since B paid KRW 300,000 with the intention to approve the debt.

A debt approval as a ground for interruption of extinctive prescription is established by indicating that an obligor, who is a party to the benefit of prescription, knows that he/she has a right to the person who is to lose his/her claim due to the completion of extinctive prescription. It does not require any form in the manner of indication, and it is not explicitly explicit, and it is sufficient that an implied indication of debt approval is made by means of enabling the other party to whom the indication is based on the premise that the obligor is aware of the existence and amount of the debt.

Supreme Court Decision 2013Da207125 Decided October 11, 2013, etc.