A. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire pleadings as indicated in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 5 million to Defendant B on June 14, 2013, and the Plaintiff also lent the said Plaintiff’s cash card to the said Defendant. However, the said Defendant withdrawn KRW 31,811,018 in total from July 15, 2013 to October 14, 2013 by using the said cash card (hereinafter “the instant loan”); the said Defendant, on November 3, 2016, prepared a written agreement from May 25, 2017 to KRW 1,000,000,000,000,000 from February 15, 2017 to October 14, 2013, and the said agreement cannot be acknowledged to have repaid the instant loan to the Plaintiff.

According to this, the above defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from June 10, 2017 to the day of full payment, which is the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case among the loans of this case filed by the plaintiff.

B. Defendant B asserted that the amount actually borrowed out of the instant loan is limited to KRW 15 million, and the remainder is not the Plaintiff’s loan that was made out of the said Defendant’s house with but with the money that was held in the said Defendant’s house. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge this, the above assertion is rejected.

2. Defendant C did not dispute the Plaintiff that there was no fact that Defendant C had been involved in the process of lending the instant loan with Defendant C’s children. However, there is no evidence to support that Defendant C borrowed the instant loan jointly with Defendant C or agreed to pay the loan. Thus, the claim against Defendant C is groundless.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant B is justified, and the claim against the defendant C is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.