A. On June 30, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) borrowed KRW 40,000,000 from the Defendant (hereinafter “instant loan”); (b) agreed to repay KRW 50,000,000 as to the said loan by July 10, 2014; and (c)0,000,000 until November 10, 2014.

B. On the same day, the Plaintiff issued to the Defendant a promissory note with the face value of KRW 80,000,000, and the issue date of the promissory note as of July 10, 2014. As to the said promissory note, a notary public drafted and issued a notarized deed as of No. 772, 2014 (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”).

C. Since July 10, 2014, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 14,000,000 as well as KRW 14,000,000 as of July 11, 2014, and KRW 6,000,00 as of July 15, 2014 to the account designated by the Defendant as repayment.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserts that, as the Plaintiff paid KRW 30,000,000 among the instant loans up to July 15, 2014, the Plaintiff agreed with the Defendant at that time to be supplied with the remaining interest at KRW 10,000,000, the Defendant asserts that the remainder of the obligation based on the instant notarial deed is limited to KRW 20,000,000,000 in total of the remaining principal and interest KRW 10,000,000,000. The Defendant did not agree to 10,000,000,000, the interest pertaining to the instant loans of KRW 80,000,000. The Plaintiff initially agreed to return to the Defendant. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant is liable to pay KRW 50,500,000,000, excluding the remainder of the repayment of KRW 30,000,00.

B. According to the above facts, the Plaintiff’s debt against the Defendant is based on a monetary loan agreement, and according to Articles 2(1), 2(3), and 2(4) of the former Interest Limitation Act (amended by Act No. 12227, Jan. 14, 2014) and Article 2(1) of the former Interest Limitation Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 25376, Jun. 11, 2014).