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. Basic facts

A. A. Around October 25, 2000, the Dongdong Credit Depository Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Ydong Credit Depository”) set KRW 1,000,000 to the Defendant as the due date for payment, and the overdue interest at 29% per annum.

B. On August 27, 2001, the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation was declared bankrupt by the Seoul Central District Court and was appointed as the trustee in bankruptcy of the Korea Coast Guard.

The Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the “Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation”) in the bankrupt depository of the Maritime Affairs and Fisheries (hereinafter referred to as the “Korea Deposit Insurance

On January 3, 2006, the Seoul Central District Court (Seoul Central District Court 2005da2276261) filed a lawsuit for the loan claim stated in the paragraph, and the Seoul Central District Court rendered a decision of performance recommendation that "the defendant shall pay the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation 1,054,907 won and 1,054,662 won with 29% interest per annum from April 26, 2001 to the date of full payment." The above decision of performance recommendation was finalized on January 21, 2006.

(c) The Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation shall be affiliated with the Plaintiff (former Reorganization Corporation) on May 2008.

The claim for the judgment stated in the subsection was transferred.

As of January 5, 2016, the balance of the judgment amount is KRW 1,843,018.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 and 5 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleading

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 1,843,018 to the Plaintiff the balance of the judgment amount.

B. As to this, the defendant asserted that the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation paid KRW 1,000,000 to the Corporation around 2006 and was exempted from the remainder of the obligation. However, it is not sufficient to acknowledge the result of the fact inquiry by the court of this case, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and the defendant's defense is without merit

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.