1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is as follows, except for the following determination as to the assertion of a novation added by the defendant to the court of first instance, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The Defendant’s judgment on the assertion of novation is stated in the preparatory document dated January 15, 2010 as “the date of December 15, 2010” in the legal document dated July 12, 2018, which appears to be a clerical error in the letter of borrowing “the date of January 15, 2010.”

The loan certificate (No. 1-1) merely provides that the Defendant borrowed KRW 180 million from the Plaintiff, and there is no indication as to interest. By drawing up the above loan certificate, there was a novation agreement to extinguish the old loan principal, which was agreed at KRW 20 million per annum of interest and KRW 180 million per annum of interest, and to establish the new debt, which was decided not to pay interest, with KRW 104,500,000, after January 15, 2010, the Defendant paid KRW 104,50,000 to the Plaintiff, and the Defendant claimed that the remainder of the loan remains KRW 75,50,000.

It is true that the interest agreement has not been written in the first (the second (the second) evidence No. 1.

However, according to the facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, Gap evidence 2-2, Eul evidence 4-6 (including the branch numbers that have a serial number) and the whole purport of the pleadings, the defendant has previously been designated and borrowed KRW 200 million from the plaintiff as 1% per month interest, and accordingly, paid interest at 1% per month to the plaintiff. The above loan certificate does not state the purport that the above loan certificate is exempted from interest at 1% per month. The defendant has not stated that the money equivalent to KRW 1.7 million per month or KRW 1.8 million per month from May 10, 2016 after preparing the above loan certificate. It is recognized that the defendant has regularly paid the plaintiff the money equivalent to KRW 1.7 million per month until May 10, 2016. The above amount is the amount equivalent to 1% per month of the leased principal ( KRW 180 million or KRW 170 million).