1. The Defendants jointly and severally agreed to the Plaintiff KRW 300,000,000 and Defendant B Co., Ltd. from May 3, 2016.

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant B is a corporation that engages in the business of importing, selling, or lending wabing in the name of “E” in Gangnam-gu Seoul, and Defendant C is the representative director of Defendant B.

B. On January 14, 2008, the Defendants drafted a loan certificate stating that “the amount of KRW 800 million shall be used for six months from the gold day, and the interest rate shall be 18% per annum,” to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1-2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff asserted the loan amount of KRW 80 million on the loan certificate of this case and the Plaintiff’s additional loan amount of KRW 150 million to the Defendants after drawing up the loan certificate of this case and then seek payment of KRW 300 million as an express partial claim of KRW 950 million and damages for delay.

B. The Defendants’ assertion was made in advance with the intent to obtain an investment of KRW 80 million from the Plaintiff. Since the preparation of the instant loan certificate, the Plaintiff paid only KRW 680,000,000, not KRW 800,000,000.

The said money received from the Plaintiff was not a loan promising the repayment of principal and interest, but an investment amount to be paid when profit was created. However, since no profit was created, the Defendants did not have the obligation to return the said money to the Plaintiff.

In addition, the Defendants paid the Plaintiff investment profits of KRW 6,125,720 on February 4, 2008, and KRW 6,389,830 on March 10, 2008, and around May 10, 2008, the Defendants paid KRW 2,90,000 to the Plaintiff’s partner’s partner as investment profits. around October 2008, the Defendants paid KRW 128,808,000 on bail sales price of KRW 13 sold by the Defendants as investment profits. On January 25, 2012, the Defendants were forced to enforce the Defendants’ movable property and paid KRW 30 million more.

3. Determination

A. The amount that the Plaintiff paid to the Defendants on the loan certificate of this case is reasonable and reasonable.