1. The Defendants are jointly and severally and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 70 million, and 5% per annum from April 15, 2015 to June 24, 2015.

1. In full view of the purport of each statement in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 as to the cause of the plaintiff's claim, the plaintiff operated the Cheongdong manufacturing business, etc. in Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, and the defendant corporation Gap (hereinafter "the defendant corporation") was established for the purpose of indoor construction business, etc. and changed as of January 2, 2015, and the defendant Eul was appointed as the representative director of the defendant corporation from March 24, 2006 to December 24, 2014. The plaintiff lent KRW 70 million from the defendant corporation's bank account, the representative director of the defendant corporation, to the defendant corporation's bank account, and divided the above KRW 70 million from Sep. 6, 2014 to the defendant corporation's account, and the defendant corporation borrowed KRW 70 million for the purpose of indoor construction business, etc., and the defendant corporation divided the above KRW 150,150,150,150,150.

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the plaintiff the above loans of KRW 70 million and the damages for delay at each rate of KRW 20% per annum under the Civil Act from April 15, 2015 to June 24, 2015, which is obvious from the date of the final delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case, to June 24, 2015, which is the date of this judgment, and from the next day to the date of full payment.

2. As to the assertion of the Defendant Company, the Defendant Company: (a) personally borrowed the above KRW 70 million; and (b) as at the time when the Defendant Company held office as the representative director of the Defendant Company, preparing and delivering the above confirmation document to the Plaintiff under the name of the Defendant Company was to repay the personal debt by the means of the recognition as the representative director; and (c) thus, the Defendant Company constitutes a tort.