1. The Defendants shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 80,000,000 and the interest rate therefor from November 1, 2017 to the date of full payment.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of pleadings and arguments as to the cause of the claim in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 5 (including household numbers), the plaintiff set a total of KRW 80 million to the defendants from April 10, 2016 to May 10, 2016 as interest rate of KRW 100,000 per annum (1.5% per annum), and the defendants agreed to pay that amount within two years.

Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay interest or delay damages calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from November 1, 2017 to the date of full payment, which is the day following the period when the Plaintiff is jointly and severally liable for 80 million won and interest thereon.

2. The defendants' assertion and judgment

A. The Defendants asserted that the Plaintiff paid KRW 1 million each on August 1, 2016, August 31, 2018, and October 1, 2016.

However, the Plaintiff asserts that the sum of KRW 3 million was appropriated for the interest accrued up to July 2017, and thereafter, sought only the payment of interest or delay damages from November 1, 2017, and there is no evidence to acknowledge that the said KRW 3 million was appropriated for the principal amount of KRW 80 million. Thus, it cannot be appropriated for the principal.

Therefore, the defendants' assertion is without merit.

B. In addition, the Defendants asserted that they paid the Plaintiff KRW 5 million in addition, on October 9, 2016, and that Defendant B paid the Plaintiff KRW 5 million in addition, there is no dispute between the parties.

However, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the argument in the statement No. 5, Defendant B’s lease from the Plaintiff on September 28, 2016, for KRW 5 million and KRW 750,000 per month of rent, and on October 9, 2016, it can be acknowledged that the Plaintiff paid KRW 5 million to the Plaintiff as a lease deposit. Thus, the Plaintiff’s loan claim cannot be appropriated for the amount of KRW 5 million.

Meanwhile, even if the Defendants asserted that the claim for the refund of lease deposit should be deducted from the Plaintiff’s loan claim, the Plaintiff’s assertion is against Defendant B from July 2017 to October 2017.