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. Facts of recognition;

A. On November 14, 2005, the plaintiff paid 300,000 won to the defendant at a monthly rate of 3% from February 16, 2006 to June 23, 2006 to the plaintiff four times, and 300,000 won to May 31, 2007.

was set up and lent.

B. From February 16, 2006 to May 31, 2007, the Defendant paid each of the money indicated in the “amount of repayment” column in the attached Table to the Plaintiff as repayment of the said borrowed money.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. If the amount of each of the Defendant’s repayment is appropriated in the order of statutory appropriation of performance as shown in the attached Table, the amount of the Plaintiff’s loan to the Defendant remains at KRW 10 million and interest KRW 1,102,440,000 as of May 31, 2007, which is the final repayment date.

The former Interest Limitation Act was repealed on January 13, 1998 and enforced again on June 30, 2007, and it does not apply until May 31, 2007, which is the final repayment date of the defendant.

As to this, the defendant set up a defense to the effect that he agreed with the plaintiff or the defendant designated the amount of the above repayment to cover all the principal amount. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge it, and the defendant's defense

[A] Even if the Defendant, as the Defendant’s argument, designated that the principal would be repaid at the time of repayment, the appropriation order under Article 479 of the Civil Act is stipulated in the order of appropriation for payment of expenses, interest, and principal, and Article 476 of the same Act concerning appropriation for payment of the principal must be appropriated in the order of expenses, interest, and principal, in principle, instead of applying mutatis mutandis (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Da12399, Jun. 11, 2009). Therefore, each repayment amount shall be preferentially appropriated for interest (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Da12399, Jun. 11, 2009). Accordingly, Article 3(1) and (3) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from July 8, 2009 to the day following the day of delivery of the copy