A. The Plaintiff loaned KRW 10 million to the Defendant on December 2, 2013, KRW 10 million on December 27, 2013, KRW 10 million on December 27, 2013, KRW 12 million on January 24, 2014, and KRW 12 million on June 1, 2014.

B. On June 13, 2014, the Defendant prepared and issued to the Plaintiff a certificate of loan that “the Defendant borrowed KRW 35 million from the Plaintiff at the interest rate of 18% per annum and on September 1, 2014.”

[Based on recognition, Gap evidence Nos. 1 (which does not conflict with the other party's stamp image part), and the authenticity of the entire document is presumed to have been established. The defendant's defense that this document was forged by the plaintiff, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it), Gap evidence Nos. 3 and 9 (which includes the number of pages), the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. As long as the formation of the judgment document is deemed to be authentic, the court shall, in principle, recognize the existence and content of declaration of intent in accordance with the language and text stated in the disposition document, unless there is any reflective evidence acceptable to deny the contents of the statement.

(2) The Plaintiff is obligated to pay damages for delay from September 1, 2014 to October 22, 2015, the agreement on the delivery date of the original copy of the payment order of this case, to 2008Da88016, Jan. 14, 2010, and Supreme Court Decision 2016Da2048, May 24, 2016, etc.). In the instant case, unless there is any clear and acceptable evidence to deny the contents of the above loan (Evidence A 1) as the above loan certificate was forged, the existence and contents of the expression of intent should be recognized as stated in the above loan certificate. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the above loan amount of KRW 35 million, and as the Plaintiff seeks, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the above loan amount of KRW 35 million from September 1, 2014 to October 22, 2015 with the annual interest rate of KRW 18% from the next day to the next day of the litigation.

3. According to the conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted on the grounds of its reasoning, and it is so decided as per Disposition.