1. The Plaintiff’s debt to the Defendant is KRW 26,381,640 and KRW 2,867,010 among them, starting from July 7, 2015.

1. Basic facts

A. The Solomon Mutual Savings Bank (hereinafter “ Solomon Mutual Savings Bank”) filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Samsung Card Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Malomon Mutual Savings Bank”) was merged with Samsung Capital Co., Ltd. on February 1, 2004, and the Samsung Card was transferred the claim for the amount of loans against the Plaintiff (which means the Plaintiff of this case; hereinafter the same shall apply) from Samsung Capital Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Malomon Mutual Savings Bank”), and that the transaction with Samsung Capital Co., Ltd. was also indicated as Samsung Card Co., Ltd. on February 1, 2004.

B. In the above case, the court rendered a decision on performance recommendation (hereinafter “the decision on performance recommendation of this case”) to the effect that “the plaintiff shall pay to Solomon Mutual Savings Bank 16,041,654 won and 10,000 won among them at the rate of 29.9% per annum from November 25, 2006 to the full payment date” (hereinafter “the decision on performance recommendation of this case”). The above decision on performance recommendation was delivered to the plaintiff on February 20, 207, and was finalized on March 7, 2007.

C. On April 26, 2011, the Defendant received the claim against the Plaintiff from Solomon Mutual Savings Bank re-transfered the claim against the Plaintiff, and completed the notification of the assignment of the claim to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 3, Gap evidence 17-1, Eul evidence 5 and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff received a loan from Samsung Card was 7,00,000 won, and the Plaintiff received a loan from the Samsung Card without passbook, and that the Plaintiff repaid KRW 4,638,964 on March 22, 2004, with the deposit without passbook and repaid KRW 1,286,164 on February 7, 2013, and with the confirmation of the completion of the obligation from the National Dental Fund, the Defendant collected KRW 4,132,90 on the basis of the instant performance recommendation decision, and thus, the Defendant collected KRW 4,132,90 on the basis of the instant performance recommendation decision. Accordingly, the Plaintiff sought confirmation that the Defendant did not have a debt to the Defendant and rejected compulsory execution based on the instant performance recommendation decision. Of the collected money collected by the Defendant, KRW 4,132,980 and its related amount.