1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 91,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from November 24, 2015 to the day of full payment.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 18, 2013, the Defendant agreed to borrow KRW 100 million as security deposit at the subcontracted period to the Plaintiff at the same time as the C Apartment Co., Ltd (hereinafter “instant construction”).

B. On April 18, 2013, the Defendant’s representative director D’s father, drafted a statement of performance that he borrowed KRW 100 million from the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant statement of performance”).

C. On April 18, 2013, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 91 million to the deposit account in the name of D.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including a provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the loan amount of KRW 91 million and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from November 24, 2015 to the day of full payment, which is the day following the day of delivery of a copy of the instant complaint, which is the day of delivery of the copy of the instant complaint.

B. The defendant asserts that the plaintiff paid the above money to D and E for the purpose of expenses, not as the deposit for the Corporation of this case, and that D abused the defendant's power of representation at the time when D borrowed money from the plaintiff, and that the plaintiff was aware of the abuse of D's power of representation. However, as seen above, D's statement of execution was prepared at the time of the defendant's representative director, and D's representative director at the time of the defendant's representative director at the time could independently represent the defendant. The plaintiff transferred money to D's account under the name of the defendant's representative director at the time of the defendant's testimony. In full view of the whole purport of the arguments in witness E's testimony, it is recognized that the execution statement of this case was prepared by E and the defendant's representative director at the time of the defendant's testimony, and that each statement in Eul Nos. 1 through 5 was paid with the above money as the loan

D. In the absence of the defendant's power of representation, D.