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. On February 27, 2010, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 10,000,00 to the Defendant at 24% per annum without due date (2%) on the basis of the determination of the cause of the claim. The fact that the Defendant repaid interest to the Plaintiff by May 27, 2016 is not in dispute between the parties, or that the Defendant paid interest to the Plaintiff by May 27, 2016, may be recognized in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the items in subparagraphs A and 2.

On the other hand, a peremptory notice in a loan for consumption for which no agreement is reached as to the time of return under Article 603(2) of the Civil Act may be served as a delivery of a copy of the complaint (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 68Da2313, Nov. 28, 1969). Since it is apparent in the record that the Defendant was served on November 27, 2016, the Defendant’s delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case is obvious, it can be deemed that the period of repayment for the Defendant’s loan obligation has arrived after the lapse of a considerable period prescribed in the above provision from that time to the closing of the first instance trial proceedings ( April

Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff interest or delay damages at the rate of 24% per annum, which is the agreed interest rate from May 28, 2016 to the date of full payment.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. First, the Defendant asserts to the effect that the statute of limitations has expired from February 27, 2010, when five years have elapsed since February 27, 2015, which was the date of borrowing, since the above loan claims were commercial claims arising in the course of commercial transactions between the Plaintiff operating the money on bail and the Defendant. Even if the statute of limitations for the above loan claims is five years, as alleged by the Defendant, the Defendant paid interest on the above loan claims amounting to KRW 200,00 per month from March 201 to May 15, 2016, and the payment of interest by the Defendant constitutes the approval of the above loan obligations, which are the grounds for suspending the statute of limitations, and the instant lawsuit at issue falls under the approval of the foregoing loan obligations, which are the grounds for suspending the statute of limitations.