A. On February 25, 2016, the Defendant invested KRW 30,000,00 from the Plaintiff and on April 27, 2016, paid KRW 625,000 to the Plaintiff the interest rate of KRW 30,00,00 per annum on the 25% on the 27th day of each month, on the condition that the Defendant agreed to pay all principal and interest until April 27, 2017 (hereinafter “Agreement 1”) and received an additional investment of KRW 25,00,000 from the Plaintiff, and on May 25, 2016, agreed to pay the Plaintiff the said KRW 25,00,000 (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

B. On April 28, 2016, the Plaintiff paid KRW 25,000,00 to the Defendant in accordance with the second agreement, and the Defendant paid KRW 625,000 to the Plaintiff six times from May 28, 2016 to six times pursuant to the first agreement.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 and 2 (if there are additional numbers, including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the investment amount of KRW 30,000,000 under the first agreement and interest or delay damages thereon, the investment amount of KRW 25,00,000 under the second agreement, and delay damages therefor, unless there are special circumstances to the Plaintiff.

B. The judgment of the defendant's assertion (1) is that the agreement Nos. 1 and 2 is null and void as a false declaration of agreement. The above 55,00,000 won is the price for the goods paid under the same business agreement related to the supply of cosmetics produced by the defendant. Thus, it is not sufficient to recognize it solely with the materials submitted by the defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

(2) Next, as the Defendant supplied the Plaintiff with cosmetics amounting to KRW 2,404,50 on June 20, 2016, the Defendant asserted that the aforementioned cosmetics should be deducted from KRW 55,00,00,00. Thus, it is recognized that the respective descriptions of the evidence Nos. 5 and 7 have been entered into between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.