1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 25,00,000 for the Plaintiff and 10% per annum from April 29, 2009 to May 14, 2014; and (b).

1. The authenticity of the document is presumed to have been established on the grounds that Gap evidence No. 1 (the result of appraisal of the appraiser C's seal impression is recognized that the subsequent stamp image after the defendant's name was based on the seal of the defendant, and thus, the authenticity of the document is presumed to be established. The defendant defense that the plaintiff forged the document by creating and sealing the same seal as that of the defendant's seal imprint, but the above document is not sufficient to be recognized solely for the reasons indicated in Eul evidence No. 1 through 14, Eul evidence video and evidence No. 15, evidence No. 15, and evidence No. 2 and 3). In full view of the purport of the argument as a whole, it can be acknowledged that the plaintiff lent the document to the defendant on April 29, 2009 by setting the amount of 25 million won to 10% per annum interest.

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff interest and delay damages calculated at the rate of 10% per annum from April 29, 2009 to May 14, 2014, which is the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case from April 29, 2009, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is justified.