1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Basic Facts

The plaintiff (formerly: C) is a company whose business purpose is to manufacture and sell electricity and electronic equipment, and D (hereinafter referred to as "D") is a company whose business purpose is to manufacture automation equipment, etc., and the defendant is a person who was registered as a representative director on the register of corporate register of D from June 201 to October 18, 2012.

On June 20, 2012, the Plaintiff leased D the loan of KRW 30,00,000 (hereinafter “instant loan”) with the maturity of repayment on August 30, 2012 and interest at 20% per annum (25% per annum for delay). The Defendant jointly and severally guaranteed D’s obligation to the Plaintiff.

(A) 【No. 3 of this case’s loan 30,000,00 won and damages for delay are liable to the Plaintiff, barring any special circumstance, according to the above-mentioned facts in light of the fact that there is no dispute about the ground for recognition, the entry of Gap’s evidence No. 3 of this case’s loan, the assertion of the purport of the entire pleadings, and the ground for appeal.

The defendant's defense is asserted to the effect that "the plaintiff's loan claim of this case was a commercial claim and its five-year extinctive prescription has already expired before the lawsuit of this case was filed."

On the other hand, a claim arising from an act of both parties as a commercial activity as well as a claim arising from an act of both parties which constitutes a commercial activity is subject to the period of five years under Article 64 of the Commercial Act. Such commercial activity includes not only the basic commercial activity falling under any of the subparagraphs of Article 46 of the Commercial Act but also the ancillary commercial activity that merchants conduct for their business (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2005Da7863, May 27, 2005; 2005Da62464, Jan. 13, 2006); comprehensively taking into account the above basic facts and the statements in subparagraphs 2 through 4 above, and the whole purport of arguments in the statement in subparagraphs 1, 2012, namely, E, the representative of the plaintiff, around the lending date of the loan of this case.