A. On August 26, 2010, the Plaintiff leased KRW 110,000,000 to the Defendant on a five-day basis.

Therefore, the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 10,000,000 won with 15% interest per annum from the day after the delivery date of the copy of the complaint of this case to the day of complete payment.

B. Defendant (1) lent KRW 80,000,000 to the Defendant on August 23, 2010 (Hamanman) and deducted 10% of the loan amount from the interest rate. On August 26, 2010, the Plaintiff, just as the Plaintiff lent KRW 30,000,000,000, deducted 10% of the loan amount from the interest rate to the Defendant, and the Defendant agreed to pay 110,000,000 after five days.

(2) The Defendant repaid the Plaintiff a total of KRW 30,00,000,000 on early 201, around 30,000,000 around summer, and around the end of 20,000,000 around the end of 2011, and KRW 30,000,000 in three equal installments from around early 201 to August 2012, and repaid all of the loans.

(3) The Plaintiff is an entity engaging in credit business, and thus, the Plaintiff’s loan claims were extinguished by the extinctive prescription under the Commercial Act.

2. Determination

A. In a case where the authenticity of a disposal document is recognized, the existence of a juristic act in its content must be recognized unless there are clear and acceptable circumstances that deny the existence of the expression of intent expressed in the document and the content thereof (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 89Meu16505, Mar. 23, 1990). The content of evidence A No. 1 (Evidence) is clearly stated that the Defendant borrowed KRW 10,000,000 from the Plaintiff on or after the maturity of five days, and it is apparent that this document is a disposal document.

B. The evidence presented by the Defendant alone as to the Defendant’s assertion of prior interest deduction is insufficient to recognize it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

C. As to the Defendant’s assertion of repayment, the evidence alone presented by the Defendant is insufficient to recognize it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

The defendant.