A. In full view of the Plaintiff’s assertion as to Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (the fact that the Defendant has signed in blank, and thus the authenticity of the entire document is presumed to be established. The Defendant contests to the purport that the above document was written at will after signing in blank, or there is no evidence to prove that the Defendant signed in blank document, and the assertion is not accepted) and the purport of the whole entries and arguments as to Gap evidence Nos. 3, it can be acknowledged that the Defendant lent KRW 10,000,000 to the Plaintiff on January 24, 2006 without fixing the due date. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff damages for delay from February 5, 2014, which is the day following the delivery of the original copy of the payment order of this case, to the Plaintiff.

The Plaintiff sought for the payment of damages for delay from January 24, 2006. However, it is reasonable to view that the above loan claims were due only on February 4, 2014 when the original copy of the instant payment order was delivered to the Defendant according to the declaration of intent to seek the payment, and thus, the Plaintiff’s allegation in this part is rejected.

B. The defendant asserts that the defendant's defense is offset against the amount on an equal basis with the above loan claims against the plaintiff by making a final judgment claim against the plaintiff as an automatic claim.

Comprehensively taking account of the respective descriptions and arguments of evidence Nos. 3-1, 2, and 3-3, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff, D, and C on May 29, 2012, seeking the return of the amount paid as the purchase price for the purchase of land under 2012 Gohap5315, i.e., the Plaintiff and C, jointly and severally, to the Defendant from October 3, 2012, and from May 5, 2012, respectively, from May 24, 2013 to May 24, 2013.