1. The Defendant’s KRW 50 million and KRW 40 million among the Plaintiff’s KRW 50 million shall be KRW 10 million from September 3, 2013 and KRW 10 million.

1. Basic facts

A. On August 3, 2012, the Defendant borrowed KRW 40 million from Nonparty C (hereinafter “first loan”) and KRW 10 million in August 17, 2012 (hereinafter “second loan”) and KRW 50 million in total from August 17, 2012, the Defendant borrowed KRW 1.5% per interest month, KRW 3% per month interest in arrears (where interest is paid for at least five days), and the due date for repayment on August 3, 2015.

B. The Defendant did not pay C interest on the first loan from September 3, 2013, and interest on the second loan from September 17, 2013.

C. On April 3, 2014, C transferred claims with the principal and interest of the first and second loans to the Plaintiff, and sent content-certified mail to the Defendant on the same day, and notified the Defendant of the assignment of claims.

[Grounds for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap 1-3 evidence, Gap 8 evidence (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. According to the facts of the above recognition, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the interest and delay damages calculated at the rate of 30% per annum for the Plaintiff within the scope of the agreed interest rate for the amount of KRW 50 million and KRW 40 million from September 3, 2013, and for the amount of KRW 10 million from September 17, 2013 to the date of full payment.

In regard to this, the defendant argued that since each of the above loans is money for gambling, each of the above loans for consumption is null and void pursuant to Article 103 of the Civil Code, but it is insufficient to recognize that each of the above loans was received with money for gambling only with the statement of Eul evidence No. 1, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Therefore, the defendant's defense is without merit.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified.