1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 7,682,750 as well as KRW 2,99,99 among them, per annum from November 24, 2016 to the day of full payment.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3 as to the cause of the claim, the court below acknowledged the fact that, on February 8, 2012, the Hanchi Savings Bank (hereinafter referred to as the “instant loan”) made a loan with the interest of KRW 3 million at 38.9% per annum and due date on February 8, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as the “instant loan”) and transferred the instant loan to the Ecopha loan on April 27, 2016, and thereafter, on May 10, 2016, the Plaintiff, operating the financial business, agreed to become the transferee of the instant loan claim on May 10, 2016. The fact that the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the acquisition of the principal and interest of the instant loan as of November 23, 2016, the principal and interest of the instant loan with the interest of KRW 7682,750,97,989,975 won (hereinafter referred to as the Plaintiff).

According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff, the transferee of the instant lending claim, with the rate of 38.9% per annum from November 24, 2016 to the date of full payment of the principal amount of KRW 7,682,750, and damages for delay at the rate of 38.9% per annum for the principal amount of KRW 2,99,98.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. Even if the Defendant was not notified of the acquisition of the instant lending claim from the Gambling Savings Bank, as the Defendant alleged in the Defendant’s assertion on the notification of transfer, if the transferee of the instant transfer notice prepared by the transferor was presented in the pleading of the claim claim for transfer money which was filed against the debtor by the method of evidence, the obligor may be informed of the fact of the transfer, which is the content of the documentary evidence, by the display of the documentary evidence in light of social norms.

As such, the withdrawal of documentary evidence constitutes a notification of the assignment of claim to the debtor. According to the records of this case, the notice of the assignment of claim by the Bank of Solar Savings is submitted as evidence of this case, and the duplicate is served to the defendant. On March 16, 2017, the date of first pleading of this case is as follows.