2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

A. On July 1, 2008, the Defendant drafted a loan certificate (No. 1, hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”) with the following content on the Plaintiff.

The borrowed amount of KRW 38 million (38 million) shall be repaid until December 2011.

interest shall not be interest

b. The Plaintiff borrowed the Plaintiff [Grounds for recognition] the Plaintiff’s evidence No. 1, and the purport of the entire pleadings

2. As long as the authenticity of the judgment of the disposition document as to the cause of the claim is recognized, the court shall reasonably interpret the objective meaning given by the parties to the act of indication according to the contents written regardless of the parties’ internal intent. In this case, if the objective meaning of the text is clear, the court shall recognize the existence and content of the declaration of intent in accordance with the contents written in the disposition document, unless there is any clear and acceptable counter-proof that the contents may be denied.

(2) According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 38 million with respect to the loan certificate of this case, barring any special circumstance, at the rate of 5% per annum prescribed by the Civil Act from January 1, 2012 to January 12, 2016, the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, and at the rate of 15% per annum prescribed by the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, from the next day to the day of full payment, barring any special circumstance.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant asserted that the Defendant borrowed KRW 12 million from the Plaintiff before 10 years prior to the Plaintiff, and that the Plaintiff sought to the Defendant and stated that “the principal and interest of the claim that the Plaintiff lent to the Defendant is KRW 38 million, and it is necessary to repay the above amount by mutual discussion when repaying it,” and that the Plaintiff prepares a false certificate of the instant loan.

Therefore, the expression of intent in the loan certificate of this case is null and void.

B. There is no evidence to acknowledge the Defendant’s assertion.