1. The Defendants shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 300,000,000 and the interest rate thereon from October 14, 2014 to the date of full payment.

Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments as to Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the plaintiff was the representative member of the defendant limited partnership company B (hereinafter "B"), the actual defendant limited company D (hereinafter "D") on June 9, 2014, and lent KRW 300 million to the defendant Eul at the rate of 3% per month, and the defendant C prepared a loan certificate stating "B company D's representative member C" at the time of the above loan and delivered it to the plaintiff. Meanwhile, the defendant C paid the loan certificate stating "B company D's loan certificate" to the plaintiff by October 13, 2014. Meanwhile, the defendant C paid the interest of KRW 30 million per month (= KRW 30 million x 0.03%) as agreed at the time of the above loan until October 13, 2014.

In light of the above facts and the fact that Defendant C also received the above money in the qualification of Defendant B and D representatives (in-house representatives), the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 30% per annum that the Plaintiff seeks pursuant to Article 2(2) of the former Interest Limitation Act (amended by Act No. 12227, Jan. 14, 2014) within the scope of the above agreement from October 14, 2014, the day following the date of the final interest payment to the day of full payment.

The Defendants asserted that the Defendants received the above money from the Plaintiff, but they received accommodation expenses from the Plaintiffs who run a travel business for foreign tourists (E travel agencies and F travel agencies). The Defendants asserted to the effect that the Defendants would not have any money to be returned to the Plaintiff upon settlement of the expenses actually incurred in the transactions with the Plaintiff. However, Defendant C prepared and delivered a loan certificate stating that the Defendants received KRW 300 million from the Plaintiff and borrowed it. As seen earlier, Defendant C had claims against the travel company operated by the Plaintiff, as alleged by the Defendants.

Even if so, it is offset against the personal claim against the plaintiff.