1. Defendant B shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 107,00,000 and KRW 100,000 among them, from November 11, 2019 to the date of full payment.

1. The following facts do not conflict between the Plaintiff and the Defendant B:

On October 10, 2018, the Plaintiff agreed to lend KRW 100,000,000 to Defendant B and to pay interest of KRW 1,50,000 per annum (18% per annum) on October 10 each month.

B. Defendant B borrowed KRW 100,000,000 and did not pay KRW 7,000,000 out of the interest agreed from July 10, 2019 to November 10, 2019.

Therefore, Defendant B is obligated to pay the principal of KRW 107,00,000 (i.e., the principal of KRW 100,000,000) and the interest of KRW 7,00,000 for double principal of KRW 100,000,000 until November 10, 2019 (i.e., the interest of KRW 7,000,000) and the interest of KRW 18% per annum from November 11, 2019 to the date of full payment.

2. The Plaintiff asserted that Defendant C is jointly and severally liable for the repayment of the principal and interest of the loan with Defendant C, and that Defendant C is jointly and severally liable for the repayment of the principal and interest of the loan, since it borrowed money from the Plaintiff as stated in the above 1.

Witness

E testified that Defendant C was aware that he was jointly operating Defendant B and the above D.

However, the witness E is nothing more than ever judged by Defendant C, and the defendant C is not aware of the position in the above D, and the reason for the testimony as above is that the defendant C divided the talk about the D import into the defendant C. Thus, the witness E's testimony is merely a conjecture and it is difficult to believe that the witness E's testimony is merely a conjecture, and there is no other evidence to prove that the defendant C is operating the above D jointly.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant C is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant B of this case is accepted on the ground of its reasoning, and the claim against the defendant C of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.