A. The Plaintiff asserted that 2012 lent 100 million won to the Defendant with interest rate of 2% per month. From April 28, 2014 to October 13, 2015, the Plaintiff paid 40 million won as principal.

The Plaintiff’s loan claims remain as of October 13, 2015, with the principal of KRW 60 million as of October 13, 2015. From October 13, 2015, to October 22, 2016, the Defendant paid interest KRW 14.45 million from the Defendant. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the loan amount of KRW 60 million and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of KRW 24% per annum from November 1, 2016 to the date of full payment.

B. The plaintiff alleged by the defendant merely invested KRW 100 million in the defendant and did not lend it to the defendant.

The Plaintiff and the Defendant did not agree to pay interest on the return of the investment amount and the Defendant’s repayment of the amount that the Defendant repaid should be appropriated for the full principal, so the Plaintiff fully recovered the investment amount.

The plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

2. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged in Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 1, No. 3-1, No. 3-2, Gap evidence No. 4-1, and No. 4-2, the plaintiff entered into a loan agreement with the defendant for consumption, which provides that the defendant shall pay 100 million won to the defendant as the investment deposit in 2012, and that the defendant shall pay 2% interest on the loan and pay 2% interest on the loan around February 4, 2014.

① On February 4, 2014, the Defendant: (a) prepared a cash custody certificate (Evidence A 1) stating that “The Defendant borrowed 100 million won in cash from the Plaintiff with Cinvestment; (b) it is true that the Defendant borrowed the above amount; and (c) will have the said amount repaid on the last day of each month; and (d) it is evident that the Defendant agreed to pay the Plaintiff’s investment in the form of loan in accordance with the language and text of the said cash custody certificate.

② On or before February 4, 2014, the Defendant, who prepared a cash custody certificate, repaid a reasonable amount to the Plaintiff, and the amount repaid as above, will be appropriated for the principal of the loan.