A. The Plaintiff is a person engaged in the retail business of cosmetics, Defendant B is a Canadian nationality business, and Defendant C is a person engaged in the entertainment industry.

B. On June 7, 2012, the Plaintiff: (a) lent KRW 300 million to Defendant B on July 31, 2012; and (b) paid it in cash and in check; and (c) was issued by Defendant B with the loan certificate as well as six points.

C. The Plaintiff stated that Defendant C is the guarantor at the bottom of the loan certificate issued by Defendant B as above. Defendant C recognized only the parts below the witness as one’s own pen, and the result of appraisal that it is difficult to distinguish the part “written by Defendant C.”

The Plaintiff was paid KRW 230 million out of the above KRW 300 million from Defendant B until July 2012, and was paid KRW 20 million on November 18, 2015, and was not paid KRW 50 million after additional repayment.

[Reasons for Recognition] Gap evidence 1, 3, Eul evidence 1, appraiser D's appraisal result, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of recognition as to the claim against Defendant B, Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 50 million won of the borrowed amount and 5% per annum as prescribed by the Civil Act from November 19, 2015 to September 11, 2019, the delivery date of the copy of the complaint in this case, and 12% per annum as prescribed by the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, from the following day to the day of full payment.

(A) The Plaintiff filed a claim for damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from the day following the delivery of the duplicate of the instant complaint. However, as the provisions on statutory interest rate under the main sentence of Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings were promulgated on May 21, 2019 and enforced from June 1, 2019, the statutory interest rate under the above Act was 12% per annum from June 1, 2019, and thus, the portion of the claim in excess is rejected). 3.

A. The plaintiff alleged by the parties.