According to the above facts of recognition, Defendant C is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from January 1, 2015 to the day of full payment, which is the day following the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, as the Plaintiff seeks.

The Plaintiff’s claim as to Defendant B was the cause of claim against Defendant B, and the Plaintiff lent money several times to Defendant B and Defendant C, and Defendant B also agreed to pay KRW 100 million to the Plaintiff on July 31, 2014, as agreed earlier.

According to Gap's statement, on July 31, 2014, defendant Eul prepared a confirmation document stating that "the defendant CC shall pay KRW 30 million to the plaintiff on May 12, 2014 as the container transport cost (with respect to the container transport cost) and the defendant C CC shall actively cooperate with and confirm that it will be responsible for making deposits in August 2014, and it shall not be deemed that the meaning of "the obligation to pay" is a guarantee or a concurrently assumed obligation. Thus, it cannot be deemed that the defendant B is liable to pay the above KRW 100 million.

The reasons are as follows.

If Defendant B intended to pay KRW 100 million directly, the purport of the direct payment must be clearly stated, but the title of the said document is also “written confirmation of fact,” and even if viewed in itself, the said document is a report document as to the terms under which Defendant C agreed to pay KRW 100 million.