1. The Defendant’s KRW 32,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from February 20, 2018 to October 17, 2018 to the Plaintiff.

1. From April 16, 2013 to July 25, 2016, the Plaintiff asserted the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim granted a total of KRW 76,60,000 to the Defendant.

The Defendant repaid KRW 5,100,000 among the above loans.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to repay to the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 71,500,000 ( KRW 76,600,000 - KRW 5,100,000). However, the Plaintiff is obligated to waive the interest accrued during the period, and only KRW 26,50,000,000, as well as KRW 45,000.

2. Determination:

A. In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings, the Plaintiff’s lending KRW 30,000,000 to the Defendant on April 7, 2015, based on each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including the number of branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply).

B. From January 27, 2016 to July 25, 2016, the Plaintiff loaned a total of KRW 7,100,000 to the Defendant six times, and the fact that the Defendant repaid a total of KRW 5,100,000 to the Plaintiff from February 26, 2016 to June 30, 2017 does not conflict between the parties.

C. Meanwhile, according to the statement in Gap evidence No. 1, the fact that the plaintiff remitted a total of KRW 39,500,000 to the defendant from April 16, 2013 to December 24, 2015 is recognized, but it is insufficient to recognize that the remittance alone is a lending of the money, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

The Plaintiff’s remaining loan arguments are without merit. D.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 32,00,000 won (37,100,000 won - 5,100,000 won) and 15% per annum under the Civil Act from February 20, 2018, which is the day following the day when the original copy of the instant payment order was served on the Defendant, as requested by the Plaintiff, until October 17, 2018, where it is deemed reasonable to dispute over the existence of the Defendant’s obligation and the scope of the obligation.

3. Some of the Plaintiff’s claims are accepted.