1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 26,020,921 as well as KRW 4,019,697 among them, from September 14, 2016 to the day of full payment.

1. In light of the overall purport of the arguments as to the grounds of the claim Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, it is recognized that the defendant entered into a contract on the issuance and use of credit cards with the plaintiff and used the credit card issued by the plaintiff. As of August 30, 2016, it is recognized that the defendant bears the obligation of credit card-related loans as follows:

(Unit) The Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 23,513,9425,980 102,904,078,074 23.7% interest rate in arrears on the installment of the principal (including the claim) divided into principal, 3,044,527 5,580 123,555,356 15,329,018 23.7% CA 19,494,245 423,010 1,696,574 21,613,829.9% in total, 23,513,5425,580,564,834,2629, 294, 296, 296, 204, 294, 296, 296, 294, 296, 294, 294, 2016

On the other hand, the defendant asserted that the amount of credit card sales at the place of business operated by the defendant, including the amount of 130,000 won on May 4, 2016 and 130,000 won on May 10, 2016, and the amount of credit card sales at the place of business operated by the defendant without any notice on May 13, 2016, does not coincide with the claim amount. In full view of the overall purport of the arguments in the statement in subparagraphs 3 and 5 above, the plaintiff lawfully offset the amount of 386,880 won out of the amount of the Defendant's credit card member store sales at the point of South Korea, a principal bank, and the amount of 386,00 won on May 24, 2016, as stipulated in the contract between the defendant and the defendant, and then claims in this case by modifying the purport of the claim.

The defendant's above assertion is without merit.

2. The conclusion is that the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.