1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, KRW 120,093,239 against the Plaintiff and its related thereto, from December 9, 2015 to February 7, 2018.

1. Basic facts

A. On January 29, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a loan agreement to lend KRW 50 million to the Defendant at the interest rate of KRW 3.5% per month after the repayment date three months, and paid KRW 50 million to the Defendant on the same day.

B. On February 21, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a loan agreement to lend KRW 250 million to the Defendant at the interest rate of KRW 3.5% per month after the repayment date three months, and paid KRW 250 million to the Defendant on the same day.

On the other hand, the defendant paid 32.9 million won to the plaintiff again.

C. On May 12, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a loan agreement with the Defendant to lend KRW 200 million at the interest rate of KRW 3.5% per month, and on the same day, the Plaintiff paid KRW 147.5 million to the Defendant after deducting KRW 52.5 million from KRW 200 million.

On December 8, 2015, the Defendant repaid KRW 500 million out of each of the above loans to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including branch numbers in case of additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. As seen earlier, the Plaintiff deducted KRW 32.9 million from the loan on February 21, 2014, and KRW 52.5 million on May 12, 2014, respectively.

In addition, the above amount is consistent with the amount calculated as shown in the following table (hereinafter referred to as "the table of this case"). When interpreting the intent of the parties, each of the above deductions is interpreted as being paid in the interest (i) and (ii) and (n) in the three-month advance interest in accordance with the ratio of 3.5% per month, which is the agreed rate.

(b) the limitation of interest and the disposal of interest (1) as contractual interest, which exceeds the maximum interest rate under the Interest Limitation Act, shall be null and void;

Where a debtor has voluntarily paid interest exceeding the above maximum interest rate, the amount equivalent to the interest paid in excess shall be appropriated for the original, and where the original is extinguished, he/she may request the return thereof, and where the advance interest has been deducted in advance.