1. The Defendant’s KRW 40,000,000 and the Plaintiff’s annual interest thereon from April 6, 2012 to June 19, 2014.

The defendant is dissatisfied with the authenticity of Gap evidence 1 (certificate of refund), Gap evidence 2 (certificate of rent), but according to the result of appraiser C's written appraisal, the defendant's signature of the above document is recognized as the defendant's penology.

Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in each of the statements Nos. 1, 2, and 3-1 through 4-4, the Plaintiff may recognize the fact that: (a) around November 27, 201, the Plaintiff lent KRW 40,000 to the Defendant; and (b) on March 6, 2012, the Defendant prepared and issued the evidence No. 2 (Evidence) with the purport that KRW 40,000,000 shall be repaid to the Plaintiff until April 5, 2012.

Although the Defendant asserted that he was a business employee of D and received and delivered the investment money from the Plaintiff to the said company, it is difficult to reverse the above lending, and even if the Defendant’s assertion is true, since the Defendant prepared a loan certificate and paid 40,000,000 won to the Plaintiff, the fact of the loan repayment agreement is recognized.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 40,000,000 won and damages for delay calculated at each rate of 5% per annum under the Civil Act from April 6, 2012, which is the date of service of the original copy of the instant payment order, to June 19, 2014, and 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the date of full payment.

The plaintiff's claim is justified and accepted.