A. The defendant borrowed KRW 68 million from the plaintiff on July 1998 without drawing up the loan certificate (the defendant borrowed KRW 68 million from the plaintiff on July 30, 1998). The defendant then borrowed the plaintiff on October 31, 2005 (if the plaintiff requests the repayment of principal and interest as it is deemed uneasy even before the due date, the defendant will comply with the request without objection) with the loan certificate (A evidence 2; hereinafter the loan certificate of this case) stating that "the plaintiff borrowed KRW 68 million from the plaintiff on July 30, 1998."

(1) On April 9, 2004, the Plaintiff prepared and ordered a payment order against the Defendant for the payment of the above loan. On June 26, 2004, the Plaintiff applied for a payment order against the Defendant, and on June 26, 2004, the Ulsan District Court Order 2004 tea 7635 (hereinafter referred to as the “first payment order”) stating that “the Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff the amount calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from the day following the service of the payment order to the day of complete payment.”

(2) On April 7, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for the payment order (hereinafter the second payment order) with the Ulsan District Court 2014 tea1577 for the extension of the extinctive prescription of the above loan claims, and the Defendant raised an objection thereto.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1 and 2 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. The defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 68 million won with 20% interest per annum from June 12, 2004 to the day of full payment.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. Defendant’s assertion 1) From April 1993 to January 1994, the Defendant borrowed money from the Plaintiff on several occasions without a loan certificate and paid part of the money, and around February 1994, the balance of the loan amount was KRW 30 million as a result of the settlement of accounts around February 1994. Nevertheless, the Defendant, by the Plaintiff’s coercion, drafted the instant loan certificate by falsity around March 2004 by the Plaintiff’s coercion.

(1) (3) The defendant borrowed the above loan from the plaintiff as business operating expenses as a merchant operating the clothing agency.