A. On October 19, 2012, the Defendant: (a) purchased a cub car from a motor vehicle sear B on and around October 19, 2012; (b) paid in cash KRW 32.5 million out of the purchase price of a motor vehicle; and (c) received a loan from the Plaintiff Company to pay the remainder of KRW 29.9 million.

B. On the same day, the Defendant entered into a loan agreement between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff with the loan principal of KRW 29.99 million, the loan period of 36 months, the loan interest rate of 28.90% per annum, and the compensation rate of 33% per annum (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”).

C. The Plaintiff paid KRW 29,990,000 to B or C (Seoul Gangnam-gu D) to which he/she belongs the loan principal under the instant loan agreement.

As of July 17, 2014, the Defendant did not repay the principal and interest under the instant loan agreement to the Plaintiff, and the interest and damages for delay incurred KRW 17,583,494 (interest 2,983,546 damages for delay).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff lent KRW 29.99 million to the defendant in accordance with the loan agreement of this case, and the defendant asserts that the plaintiff's claim of this case is groundless because there is no transfer of the loan under the loan agreement of this case and there is no fact that the plaintiff has delegated the right to receive the loan to B.

According to the above facts, the Plaintiff and the Defendant revealed the fact that the instant loan agreement was concluded, and according to the overall purport of the Plaintiff’s statement and the entire pleadings, the terms and conditions of the Plaintiff’s loan agreement for the loan for the loan for the loan of the loan of the loan of the loan of the loan of the loan of the loan of the loan of the loan of the loan of the loan of the loan of the loan of the loan of the loan of the Plaintiff includes the contents that “the Defendant entrusts the Plaintiff with the payment of the loan application amount to the seller or related person.” The Plaintiff explained to the Defendant that the loan of the loan of