대여금
1. The Plaintiff; Defendant B, from December 1, 2018, with respect to the amount of KRW 5,000,000, and the amount of KRW 16,000,000, and the amount of KRW 16,000.
1. According to the purport of Gap evidence No. 1-1-2, 3, 6, 7, 8, and 9 of each of the above statements and arguments as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff extended loans of KRW 5 million to the defendant Eul, KRW 16 million to the defendant Eul, KRW 8.1 million to the defendant Eul, KRW 3.6 million to the defendant Eul, and KRW 3 million to the defendant Eul, respectively, and the defendant Eul received a promissory note containing the above loans from the defendant 1-2-2-3-1-2-1-2-1-2-2-3-1-2-3-2-1-2-3-1-2-1-2-1-2-1-2-3-2-1-2-6-1-2-3-2-1-2-1-6-2-1-2-1-2-3-3-3-10000,0000-6-20000-3-10-3-10
(2) Defendant D’s assertion as to the Plaintiff’s claim for damages for delay is without merit. However, Defendant D merely borrowed the above money as the promotion price for illegal sex trading business.