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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

The plaintiff is a corporation that engages in the liquor wholesale business, and the defendant is a corporation that operates the Korean-style hall with the trade name "E" in Mosung City D.

F The defendant was the representative director of the defendant from January 17, 2017 to January 18, 2019.

On March 13, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant’s representative director F to supply alcoholic beverages to the Defendant, and agreed to lend KRW 50,000,000 to the Defendant without interest and to receive KRW 2,500,000 each month from April 15, 2017 to November 15, 2018 by setting the lending date as March 15, 2017 as KRW 2,50,000 each month, and the Defendant shall be paid in installments over 20 installments each month from April 15, 2017 to November 15, 2018; however, the Plaintiff agreed to lose the benefit of the time and to receive delayed payment by adding the amount at the rate of 30% per annum per annum

(hereinafter referred to as “instant monetary loan agreement”). F’s wife C and F’s Dong G were jointly and severally guaranteed the instant monetary loan agreement.

The Plaintiff supplied alcoholic beverages to the Defendant by January 31, 2019, and the Defendant repaid KRW 41,000,000 out of the above loans to the Plaintiff by August 1, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] In light of the above facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 9 (including additional number) and the overall purport of the pleading, the defendant is obligated to pay the balance of loans that have not yet been paid to the plaintiff jointly and severally with Eul 9,000 won (=50,000,000 - 41,000,000) and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 24% per annum from November 16, 2018 to the date of complete payment, which is the date following the last repayment that the plaintiff seeks.

The defendant's assertion as to the defendant's assertion is that the monetary loan contract of this case was concluded by F individual regardless of the defendant, so the defendant is not obligated to pay.

Judgment

According to the statement No. 1, the defendant's corporate seal impression is affixed to the monetary loan contract of this case and the defendant's corporate seal impression is attached.