A. On April 5, 2009, the Defendant repaid 22,500,000 won to the Plaintiff by May 30, 2009, and issued a loan certificate (Evidence A (Evidence A 1) to the effect that the Plaintiff will accept the legal lawsuit in the event of the violation, and affixed the seal to the Plaintiff.

B. After that, on November 14, 2009, the defendant prepared a certificate of borrowing (Evidence A 2) to the effect that no objection is raised even if the defendant disposes of the defendant's assets with no repayment of the principal and interest until March 25, 2010, and the above date expires without paying the principal and interest in full.

C. Meanwhile, the Defendant filed a petition with Jeju District Court for bankruptcy and immunity under the Jeju District Court Decision 201Hadan629 and 2012Ma628, and was declared bankrupt on November 25, 2013 and granted immunity on February 18, 2014. At the time, the list of creditors submitted by the Defendant on November 13, 2012 is not included in the Plaintiff.

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

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant, from July 2008 to April 5, 2009, issued the above loan certificate to KRW 22,500,000 with respect to the sum of the money borrowed from the Plaintiff from July 2008 to April 5, 2009, and that the Plaintiff, from November 14, 2009, issued the above loan certificate to KRW 30,000 with respect to the sum of the money additionally borrowed from the Plaintiff, and sought payment of the above loan amounting to KRW 52,50,000 with respect to the above loan amount of KRW 52,50,000 and delay damages. The Defendant claimed that, at the time of drawing up the above loan certificate, the money borrowed from the Plaintiff was merely KRW 7,80,00,000,000 and the Defendant prepared the above loan certificate to KRW 30,000,000,00

The following circumstances, which are acknowledged as comprehensively considering the overall purport of the pleadings in each of the above evidence, evidence No. 3, evidence No. 4-1, evidence No. 4-2, and evidence No. 6, began to lend money to the defendant, who was aware of the fact close to the plaintiff, from around 2008.