A. On June 5, 2018, the Defendant prepared a loan certificate (Evidence A 1) stating that “50,000,000 won shall be lent to the Plaintiff and repaid until June 8, 2018.”

The Defendant did not pay the above KRW 50,000,000, and written a written statement of non-payment (Evidence A2) on July 23, 2018, stating that “The above KRW 50,000,000 shall be repaid until August 15, 2018.”

B. On July 23, 2018, the Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff KRW 50,000,000, out of KRW 270,000,000 for the unpaid construction cost of KRW 173,000,000 until August 15, 2018, and the remainder of KRW 123,00,000 within the time limit.

“The” has drawn up a note of payment for the construction cost (No. 3).

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the agreed amount of KRW 223,00,000 (= KRW 50,000,000) and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 12% per annum as prescribed by the Act on Special Cases Concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from January 10, 2019 to the date of full payment following the delivery of the complaint.

B. As to this, the defendant asserts that, in the course of performing the construction in the operation room, the plaintiff introduced the subcontractor, received the share of construction expenses from the defendant, and paid it to the subcontractor, and in order to prevent the defendant from receiving the share of construction expenses from being timely paid by the defendant, the defendant threatened the defendant and forced the defendant to prepare the above cash payment note (Evidence A 2) and the statement of payment for construction expenses (Evidence A 3).

According to the statement in Eul evidence No. 5, it is recognized that the plaintiff was punished for a fine on or around July 31, 2018 due to the crime that the plaintiff assaulted and detained the defendant.

However, this is not sufficient to recognize that the plaintiff made the above-mentioned statement of payment after the preparation of the above-mentioned statement of payment, and it is insufficient to recognize that the plaintiff made the above statement of payment by intimidation or coercion.