1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. The defendant is against the plaintiff succeeding intervenor 16,249.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On November 20, 1989, the Defendant entered into a credit card use contract with the Japanese Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Japan Bank”) and delayed repayment of the credit card use amount from February 27, 1995 while using the credit card.

B. On April 9, 1996, the Japanese bank filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the credit card payment claim with the Seoul District Court 96 Ghana42576, and the above court rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff that “the Defendant shall pay to the Japanese bank the amount calculated by the rate of 23% per annum from January 6, 1996 to the date of full payment with respect to KRW 8,361,657 and KRW 7,545,000 among them.”

(hereinafter referred to as “instant claim”) a claim under the foregoing judgment;

On December 30, 199, Japan Bank transferred the instant claim to the Reorganization Bank, Inc., and notified the Defendant of the assignment of claim at that time. On December 28, 2000, the Reorganization Bank transferred the instant claim to the Plaintiff and notified the Defendant of the assignment of claim at that time. D.

On September 18, 2012, the Plaintiff transferred the instant claims to the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff, and notified the Defendant of the assignment of claims on December 8, 2015.

E. The amount of the instant claim is KRW 6,945,00 as of February 10, 2006, interest KRW 9,304,724 as of February 10, 2006.

[Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including branch numbers in the case of additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay to the intervenor succeeding to the plaintiff 16,249,724 won and 6,945,00 won among them at the rate of 18% per annum as claimed by the plaintiff from February 11, 2006 to the date of full payment.

(1) The plaintiff's claim is dismissed as the plaintiff's claim is without merit, since the plaintiff transferred the claim of this case to the plaintiff's succeeding intervenor as seen above. 3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. The judgment of the court of first instance is unfair in conclusion. Thus, the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked,