1. Defendant B’s KRW 32.8 million and the Plaintiff’s 20% per annum from September 26, 2015 to September 30, 2015, and the following.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 13, 2009, Plaintiff B lent KRW 50 million to Defendant B.

B. On October 2, 2014, Defendant B drafted and delivered to the Plaintiff a letter of intent to repay the remainder of KRW 40 million and interest KRW 12.8 million out of the borrowed amount to the Plaintiff by April 30, 2015 (hereinafter “instant letter”).

C. Defendant B paid to the Plaintiff KRW 5 million on December 3, 2014, and KRW 15 million on February 17, 2015.

On April 24, 2015, Defendant B donated real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by Defendant B (hereinafter “instant donation”) to Defendant C, who was his wife, and completed the registration of ownership transfer.

(hereinafter referred to as the "registration of transfer of ownership in this case"). [The grounds for recognition: The fact that there is no dispute, each entry in Gap evidence 1 through Gap 6 (the evidence with a serial number includes a serial number), and the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Assertion and determination

A. The court shall recognize the existence and content of the declaration of intention as stated in the content, unless there is any clear and acceptable counter-proof to deny the contents of the statement, so long as the judgment on the claim against the defendant B is recognized as the authenticity of the statement.

(Supreme Court Decision 93Da5456 delivered on October 11, 1994). As long as Defendant B acknowledged the authenticity of each of the instant notes, Defendant B, as stated in the Plaintiff and the instant notes, concluded that the settlement agreement was reached that the principal amount of KRW 40 million, interest of KRW 12,800,000,000, in total, and KRW 52,80,000,000, in total as at the time of the preparation of the instant notes, and there is no clear and acceptable evidence to deny it.

Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 32.8 million calculated by subtracting the amount of KRW 20 million already paid from KRW 52.8 million as stated in the instant notes, and damages for delay.

B. As seen in the preceding paragraph, the existence of the preserved claim 1 as to the claim against the Defendant C and the need for preservation thereof are the fact that the Plaintiff owned the claim against the Defendant B. The Defendant B’s property at the time of the instant donation is the obligation.