A. As between July 7, 2005 and June 15, 2006, the Defendant: (a) prepared to C a certificate of loan with the following contents; and (b) borrowed KRW 276,000,000 from C without any interest agreement.

No. 50,00,000 won on July 7, 2005 on the date when the loan was made and on which the loan was due and due, on December 30, 2005, and KRW 50,000,000 on October 15, 2005 on October 30, 2007, and KRW 10,000 on January 24, 2006, KRW 10,000 on March 4, 2006, KRW 10,000 on February 28, 2006, KRW 00,000 on February 10, 200, KRW 5,000 on February 5, 2007, KRW 5,000 on May 25, 2005, KRW 8,000 on July 26, 2008; and

B. On June 16, 2015, C transferred the above loan and damages for delay to the Plaintiff, and sent the notice of assignment to the Defendant on the same day by content-certified mail, and the above content-certified mail sent to the Defendant on June 18, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, determination of the purport of whole pleadings

A. Even in a case where a claim for interest cannot be made at all on the grounds of an interest agreement on the monetary obligation for determining the cause of the claim, damages for delay caused by the debtor's delay can be claimed at the statutory rate.

(2) The Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff, who acquired C’s loan and damages for delay, a total of KRW 276,000,000,000, and damages for delay from the day following the due date of repayment of each loan, to the day of full payment, according to the above facts of recognition.

B. The defendant's assertion that there was no money borrowed from 1C on the defendant's defenses, etc., that the defendant only prepared a letter of loan by requesting C to prepare a loan certificate after the receipt of money with the advance payment from the Jeju-do consignor, and that C did not actually borrow money from C.

However, if the authenticity of the instrument is recognized, the existence and contents of the declaration of intention indicated in the instrument.