A. Defendant B, the representative director of Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) borrowed KRW 100 million with the funds for the operation of the party branch: The borrower: Defendant B and joint guarantor: The date of borrowing: Defendant B and joint guarantor: November 6, 2012; and the date of repayment: November 6, 2013; and the date of repayment: The certificate of borrowing (hereinafter “certificate of borrowing of this case”) written in the name of the Defendants, and issued it to the Plaintiff along with the respective certificates of personal seal impression in the name of the Defendants.

B. On November 6, 2012, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 100 million to the Defendant Company’s account.

[Ground of recognition] Defendant Company: A without dispute, each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including each number), the purport of the entire argument as to the purport of defendant B: The judgment of confession (Article 208(3)2 of the Civil Procedure Act, and the defendant B submitted a written objection that does not state any of the grounds for claim after being served with the original copy of the payment order and did not submit a written answer and did not appear on the date for pleading, and therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is deemed to have been led to the confession of all the facts of claim pursuant to Article 1

2. The parties' assertion

A. As indicated in the Plaintiff’s loan certificate, the Plaintiff lent KRW 100 million to the Defendant Company, and Defendant B jointly and severally guaranteed the Defendant Company’s loan obligation.

B. When the Plaintiff initially received all the construction works of the C University, the Defendant Company asked Defendant B, the president of the C University Sports University, to obtain the right to obtain the right to obtain the right, and asked Defendant B, the president of the C University Sports University, to obtain the right to obtain the right to obtain the right to obtain the right to obtain the construction works. The Defendant Company continued to hold the events held by the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff deposited KRW 100 million with the Defendant Company.

The mother and child column was deposited in the meaning of appropriation and use, not borrowed money.

The loan certificate of this case must be drawn up by the Plaintiff, stating that the loan certificate of this case must be drawn up in the form of a loan certificate, and does not include borrowing KRW 100 million.

3...