대여금
1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 220,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from July 16, 2004 to June 11, 2009 and thereafter.
1. The head of the State shall agree to pay the Plaintiff KRW 220,000,00 to the Plaintiff, respectively, and the Defendant shall make and deliver a promissory note dated September 25, 2003 with a face value of KRW 220,000,000, face value of KRW 220,000,000, the issuer, the Defendant, the payee, the Plaintiff, and the due date for payment (hereinafter “the first promissory note”) as of December 30, 203, and on April 27, 2004, with the Defendant’s mother C and the Defendant, the payee, the Plaintiff, and the due date for payment (hereinafter “the second promissory note”) as of July 15, 2004, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the said agreed amount to the Plaintiff.
2. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments as to Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 11, 12, and 13, the defendant issued the first and second promissory notes of this case with face value 220,000,000 won for the payment of the above money to the plaintiff, from March 2002 to August 2004. However, the defendant issued the first and second promissory notes of this case with face value 220,00,000 won for the payment of the above money to the plaintiff.
As to this, the Defendant asserts to the effect that (i) each of the Promissory Notes in this case was prepared by the Defendant below the Plaintiff’s strong pressure, and (ii) each of the Promissory Notes in this case was a tort claim due to the Defendant’s embezzlement, and that the three-year statute of limitations has expired.
It is insufficient to recognize that each of the Promissory Notes in this case was caused by the Plaintiff’s coercion, the Plaintiff’s punishment, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. The underlying claim of each of the Promissory Notes in this case, as seen earlier, shall be deemed an agreed amount claim based on the settlement amount of accounts receivable against the Defendant. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion on this part premised on the premise that it is a tort claim is without merit.
Therefore, the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 220,000,000.