1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 942,742,403 and KRW 541,534,732 from April 14, 2015 to the date of full payment.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 15, 2012, the Plaintiff loaned a loan of KRW 860 million to the Defendant at the maturity of 6.02% (interest rate of 18% per annum) on June 15, 2015.

B. The Defendant, by July 31, 2012, lost the benefit of time by paying only interest until July 31, 2012, and as of April 13, 2015, the principal and interest of the loan is KRW 942,742,403.

(G) Of these, KRW 541,534,732 shall be principal). [Grounds for recognition] Party A’s entry in the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. According to the above facts finding as to the primary cause of claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff a loan of KRW 942,742,403 and the principal of KRW 541,534,732 each year from April 14, 2015 to the date of full payment.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. After the defendant's assertion, B, as the actual debtor, offered B's land as security, the defendant lent only the name of the debtor, and the plaintiff was well aware of such circumstances, and thus, the defendant does not bear a loan obligation.

B. In order to establish a false declaration of agreement on the relevant legal principles, there must be an agreement between the other party and the other party as to the inconsistency. If a third party directly signs and seals on loan-related documents, such as a monetary loan agreement, etc., as the principal debtor or joint guarantor, the third party himself/herself indicates that he/she is the debtor of the loan for consumption, and the third party intended to obtain a loan under the name of the third party by avoiding the lending restriction stipulated by the financial institution, etc.

Even if the principal and interest are to be repaid at the expense of another person, barring any special circumstance, this is merely an intention to vest economic effects under a loan for consumption in another person, and it cannot be viewed as an intention to vest the legal effects of the loan for consumption in another person.