1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Facts of recognition

A. On October 24, 1997, the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation set a loan of KRW 10,000 to the Defendant at the interest rate of KRW 14.5% per annum and interest rate of KRW 21.9% per annum.

B. On March 23, 2005, the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation transferred KRW 10,567,022 to the Plaintiff a loan claim against the Defendant.

On April 22, 2005, the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation notified the Defendant of the assignment of the above assignment, and the above notification was delivered to the Defendant at that time.

C. On July 18, 2005, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the claim for acquisition of the amount (Seoul District Court 2005 Ghana215359). The Plaintiff’s performance recommendation decision was finalized on August 23, 2005, stating that “the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff 10,567,02 won and the amount calculated at the rate of 18% per annum from December 1, 2000 to the date of full payment.”

(hereinafter “instant decision on performance recommendation”). D.

On August 11, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for a payment order seeking the payment of the above amount of money (Jansan District Court 2015 tea17429), and the Defendant filed an objection on October 14, 2015 and implemented the instant litigation procedure.

[Ground of recognition] In light of the above-mentioned facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and 7, and the purport of the entire pleadings, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 10,567,02 won and delay damages calculated at the rate of 18% per annum from December 1, 200 to the date of full payment.

Judgment on the defendant's argument

A. The defendant asserts that since the defendant raised an objection against the payment order and executed it as a lawsuit after ten years from the date when the decision on performance recommendation of this case became final and conclusive, the plaintiff's claim for transfer money expired by prescription.

Article 472 (2) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that "where an obligor has filed a lawful objection against an order for payment, the obligor shall be deemed to have filed a lawsuit concerning the value of the object of claim for which an objection has been filed."