1. The defendant shall pay 28,00,000 won to the plaintiff and 30% per annum from November 1, 2014 to the day of complete payment.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. While the Defendant had continued to engage in money transactions with the Plaintiff from around 2012, the loan certificate of November 30, 2013 (hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”) written on the loan certificate of this case, stating “one million won of the borrowed money, and four percent of the interest rate (on November 30, 2014, and interest rate)” (hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”) as of November 30, 2014, the borrowing date was written on November 30, 2014, and the repayment period was written on November 30, 2013, but it is obvious that this is a clerical error.

B. Afterwards, the Plaintiff and the Defendant, under mutual agreement, corrected the “Yeocheon Won” on the loan certificate of this case as the “Yeocheon Won”.

C. Meanwhile, the Defendant paid interest as stated in the instant loan certificate only until October 31, 2014, and did not pay interest thereafter.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the agreed interest and delay damages calculated at the rate of the Plaintiff’s claim from November 1, 2014, which is the day following the last interest payment, within the agreed rate, within the limit of the agreed interest rate.

B. On November 30, 2013, the Defendant: (a) borrowed KRW 34 million from C, other than the Plaintiff; (b) drafted the instant loan certificate; (c) subsequently, the Defendant’s husband repaid KRW 6 million to the Plaintiff, corrected the amount borrowed on the instant loan certificate as KRW 28 million; (d) continued to borrow additional money from C, and (e) drafted a new certificate of loan of KRW 48 million, which was eventually null and void, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim cannot be accepted.

However, there is no sufficient evidence to acknowledge the above defendant's assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the above defendant's assertion is rejected.

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