1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 88,532,277 and KRW 48,31,881 among them 19% per annum from September 10, 2005 to the date of full payment.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 21, 2006, the defendant filed a lawsuit against the defendant by Solomon Mutual Savings Bank as Seoul Central District Court Decision 2006Ra120211, and on June 21, 2006, "the defendant shall pay to Solomon Mutual Savings Bank 88,532,277 won and 48,331,81 won, whichever is the rate of 19% per annum from September 10, 2005 to the day of full payment."

(hereinafter referred to as "previous Judgment"). (b)

On April 26, 2011, Solomon Mutual Savings Bank transferred the claim based on the previous judgment to the Plaintiff. On May 19, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for the payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) against the Defendant with the Seoul Western District Court 2016 tea38164 for the extension of the extinctive prescription period. Accordingly, the Defendant raised an objection thereto and the instant payment order was implemented as the instant lawsuit.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, purport of whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 8,532,277 won and 48,31,81 won with 19% interest per annum from September 10, 2005 to the date of full payment.

B. The defendant's assertion 1 argues that since the defendant did not receive the notification of the assignment of claims from Solomon Mutual Savings Bank, the transferor, the plaintiff cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim.

Therefore, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of arguments in evidence Nos. 3 and 5, it can be acknowledged that Solomon Mutual Savings Bank, when entering into an asset acquisition agreement with the Plaintiff, delegated the Plaintiff with the authority to notify the assignment of claims on behalf of Solomon Mutual Savings Bank, Solomon Mutual Savings Bank, as to the claim for the amount of transfer based on the previous judgment. The Plaintiff’s application for the instant payment order and delivery of the original original copy of the payment order to the Defendant, thereby eventually, the Plaintiff