A. The Plaintiff, as a fraternity, lent money several times to the Defendant, he/she became aware of as a fraternity, and on August 30, 2013, the Plaintiff prepared a loan certificate of KRW 37.3 million with the Defendant’s name and affixed the seal received from the Defendant, and presented it to the Defendant. The Defendant affixed his/her seal on the side stated “the obligor requested the creditor to receive the loan” on the end of the loan certificate.

B. On the same day, the Plaintiff affixed a seal received from the Defendant to the Defendant’s name on the promissory note paper written by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff’s face value KRW 37,300,000, and the issuer’s Defendant, and then presented it to the Defendant. Accordingly, the Defendant affixed a seal to the Defendant on the side of the entry “the obligor” on the promissory note written by the obligee

[Ground of recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 4 (this is presumed to be the authenticity of each document since there is no dispute over the chassis, promissory note, defendant's seal impression, and unmanned seal. The defendant's defense that each of the above documents was made by the plaintiff's coercion, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it. Rather, in full view of the purport of the whole argument as to Gap's evidence No. 10, the defendant filed a complaint against the plaintiff as a charge of coercion, etc., but the prosecutor's office made a decision not to prosecute the plaintiff as to the above case on December 28, 2017 only the circumstance where the defendant made a decision not to prosecute the plaintiff as to the above case's non-prosecution

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is 15% per annum as prescribed by the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from April 20, 2016 to the date of full payment, which is the day following the day when the original copy of the instant payment order, sought by the plaintiff, was served on the plaintiff, after deducting 7 million won from the loan amount of KRW 37,300,000,000, which the plaintiff had received reimbursement from the defendant.