1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 48,320,545 and KRW 47,578,971, which shall be the year from November 26, 2019 to the day of full payment.

1. The facts indicated in the separate sheet on the grounds of the Plaintiff’s claim (However, “creditor” and “debtor” are alleged to the effect that there is no dispute between the parties or the fact that the Defendant bears the credit card payment obligation against the Plaintiff in the reply) and the overall purport of the arguments as to the Plaintiff’s claim may be acknowledged in full view of the respective statements and arguments stated in subparagraphs A and 3.

According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 23.9% per annum from November 26, 2019 to the date of full payment, as to the total amount of KRW 48,320,545 as of November 25, 2019 and the principal amount of KRW 47,578,971 as of the base date.

2. On December 2, 2019, the Defendant filed an application for individual rehabilitation with the Gwangju District Court 2019 Congress 519257 on the determination of the Defendant’s assertion. The Plaintiff asserts to the effect that it is impossible to comply with the Plaintiff’s claim since the Plaintiff received repayment through the individual rehabilitation procedure.

However, it is not affected by the procedure of individual rehabilitation until the lawsuit already filed is confirmed as a claim for individual rehabilitation in the procedure of individual rehabilitation (it is evident that the lawsuit in this case was filed on November 27, 2019, before the defendant applied for the above individual rehabilitation). Even if the judgment in this case becomes final and conclusive, the defendant did not suffer any disadvantage in making a decision to commence the procedure of individual rehabilitation or preparing a draft repayment plan in the procedure of individual rehabilitation and obtaining authorization, and thus, the defendant's argument to the above purport is rejected.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant of this case against the defendant is justified, and it is so decided as per Disposition.