A. Recognizing facts 1) The Plaintiff loaned a loan of KRW 300 million to the Defendant, KRW 100 million on February 28, 2013, KRW 50 million on March 20, 2013, KRW 30 million on July 3, 2013, KRW 100 million on August 30, 2013, KRW 300,000 on August 30, 2013, KRW 300,000,000 on a loan of KRW 300,000,000,000 on February 27, 2014, KRW 385,000 on a loan of KRW 380,000 on a loan of KRW 1.3 billion on a loan of KRW 300,000,000 on a loan of KRW 385,00,000 on a loan of KRW 380,300,000.

(3) On January 12, 2018, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a content-certified mail demanding that “the Plaintiff pay a total of KRW 423,00,000 that the Plaintiff lent to the Defendant from February 28, 2013 to May 19, 2014,” and the Defendant received the content-certified mail around that time. At that time, the Defendant received the said content-certified mail [the grounds for recognition] without dispute, Party A’s evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including serial numbers), Party B’s evidence No. 1, and the purport of the entire pleadings and arguments.

B. According to the above facts, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 385,00,000 on eight occasions between February 28, 2013 and April 2, 2014. Among them, with respect to loans of KRW 160,000,000,000 under the instant agreement, a monetary loan agreement was concluded with respect to loans of KRW 160,000,000 from August 30, 2013 to November 30, 2013, with the interest rate of KRW 8% per annum from August 30, 2013, and due date. (ii) The Plaintiff asserted that there was an agreement with interest rate of KRW 160,000 per annum on loans other than loans of KRW 160,000,00. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge this. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s aforementioned assertion is without merit.

3. However, according to Article 387(2) of the Civil Act, there is no deadline for performing obligations.