1. On June 9, 2016, Defendant B Co., Ltd., Defendant C, Defendant C, as well as each of the said amounts, KRW 129,260,274.

1. On February 2013, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with the Defendants to raise funds for the E Development Project in Jin-si D (hereinafter “instant project”).

(1) The Defendants, as creditors of the Plaintiff, pay KRW 2.3 billion to the Plaintiff at the account designated by the Plaintiff. The schedule for repayment of the Defendants’ loans to Defendant Company 1.7 billion is to be repaid until November 29, 2013. The Defendants’ repayment schedule is to be repaid to Defendant Company 1.3 billion won and Defendant C 1 billion won upon completion of the instant business.

2. The Plaintiff entered into a security trust agreement with the Defendants on the instant real estate and provides the Defendant Company with KRW 3 billion in the first priority beneficiary right certificate and KRW 1 billion in the Defendant C.

3. The Plaintiff’s loan KRW 2.3 billion, which the Defendants received from the above 1 and 2, shall be disbursed as the business fund of the instant business (land, etc.).

Defendant C paid KRW 600 million to the Plaintiff by means of remitting money to the Plaintiff’s audit F account on February 19, 2013 pursuant to the instant agreement.

F on the same day, the F issued to Defendant C a certificate of borrowing that “F agrees to pay the Plaintiff the borrowed amount of KRW 600 million up to February 26, 2013,” and G jointly and severally guaranteed the Defendant C’s debt owed by F with the said loan certificate.

The Defendant Company paid KRW 1.7 billion to the Plaintiff on March 5, 2013 in accordance with the instant agreement.

The Plaintiff paid the Defendant Company a total of KRW 3 billion on December 30, 2013, KRW 200 million, and KRW 2.8 billion on August 8, 2014, and paid KRW 1 billion to Defendant C on August 21, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 5, 7 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. On the premise that the instant agreement is a monetary loan contract, the Plaintiff paid the amount in excess of the maximum interest rate under the Interest Limitation Act.