1. As to the Plaintiff’s KRW 35 million and its KRW 15 million, the Defendant shall have 24% per annum from June 26, 2009 to September 5, 2018.

Comprehensively taking account of the evidence evidence Nos. 3 and 6, the fact that the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 15 million from the Defendant on May 25, 2009 and determined interest at 40% per annum, and that the Plaintiff promised to pay KRW 20 million by subrogation to the Defendant on November 22, 2010.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 35 million won and 15 million won among them the annual interest rate within the scope of the agreement from June 26, 2009 to September 5, 2018, which is the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case; 24% per annum within the rate of 15% per annum as stipulated by the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of complete payment; and 20 million won from September 6, 2018, which is the day following the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case sought by the plaintiff as to the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum as stipulated by the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of complete payment; and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment.

The plaintiff subrogated for the defendant's credit card user's liability 7,43,00 won, and also subrogated for the 21,663,360 won related to warehouse facilities and filed a claim for the principal and interest thereof against the defendant. However, according to each of the statements in the Gap 4-1 and 2, the plaintiff can only recognize that the plaintiff subrogated for the defendant's credit card user's 7,430,000 won as the guarantor on December 8, 2009, and on the other hand, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the plaintiff subrogated for the warehouse facilities. Thus, the plaintiff's claim for this portion is difficult to accept.

On the other hand, on August 26, 2010, the defendant asserted that the debt against the plaintiff was fully settled by transferring the ownership transfer of D's land, etc. owned by the defendant to KRW 110 million, but it is recognized only by the descriptions of B's 1 to 3.