1. As to KRW 560,744,163 and KRW 369,00,00 among the Plaintiff, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 560,744,163 from March 11, 2016 to March 28, 2016.

1. Loan amount of basic facts: 369,000,000 won loan: The interest rate on May 20, 2009: the fixed interest rate under Article 3(2)1 of the General Terms and Conditions on Loan Transactions (Provisional Use): 2.89% (Selection of Article 3(2)2 of the General Terms and Conditions on Loan Transactions (Provisional Use) interest rate of 2.89% (Selection of Article 3(2)2 of the General Terms and Conditions on Loan Transactions): July 15, 2011: A full repayment shall be made on the expiration date of the repayment period. The application of Article 3(5) of the Basic Terms and Conditions on Loan Transactions (Provisional Use) shall be made on July 15, 201;

A. The Plaintiff (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Plaintiff”) entered into a loan agreement with the Defendant on the following terms, and loaned KRW 369,00,000,000.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant loan agreement” and the relevant loan claim is referred to as the “instant loan claim”). B.

The defendant did not repay the principal and interest of the above loan, and on March 11, 2016, the balance of the loan to the plaintiff against the defendant is as follows:

Of the loan principal, the agreed delay damage rate of 369,00,000 won 191,744,163 won 560,744,163 won 13.26% / [based on recognition] of absence of dispute between the parties, entry in Gap evidence 1 through 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the total amount of 560,744,163 won and 369,000,000 won among the principal and interest of the loan, and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 13.26% per annum, which is the interest rate for delayed damage, from March 11, 2016 until March 28, 2016, which is the service date of the original payment order of this case, and 15% per annum, which is stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day until the day of full payment

3. Defendant’s assertion and judgment

A. Contrary to social norms, the Defendant asserts that the loan agreement in this case is null and void as a contract contrary to the principle of no speech. 1) The Defendant’s loan agreement in this case is the Defendant’s Drhz Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Drhz”).

from B apartment.