1. The Defendants shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 88,697,260 as well as the interest rate from April 18, 2018 to the date of full payment.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 21, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 88,000,000 (one year’s advance interest, KRW 12,000,000,000) in B’s account on February 21, 2017, and KRW 20,000,00 on March 16, 2017, and KRW 88,000,000 (one year’s advance interest, KRW 12,00,000,00) in total. On April 19, 2017, the Defendants prepared a loan certificate that the Defendants paid KRW 100,00 to the Plaintiff on March 25, 2018, and overdue interest shall be jointly and severally paid at 19% per annum (hereinafter “the instant loan certificate”).

B. Defendant D paid KRW 12,500,000 to the Plaintiff on April 17, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-5, Gap evidence 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. According to the aforementioned facts, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay KRW 100 million to the Plaintiff. KRW 22,00,000, which is deducted from the interest interest, shall be appropriated for the interest accrued until March 25, 2018 as the highest interest rate prescribed by the Interest Limitation Act does not exceed 25%, and as such, KRW 12,500,000, which is paid to the Plaintiff by Defendant D on April 17, 2018. The amount of KRW 1,197,260,00 for the agreed delay damages from March 26, 2018 to April 17, 2018, shall be appropriated for the principal amount (1,197,260 won for the agreed delay damages from March 26, 2018 to April 26, 2018 to April 17, 2018.

Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff 88,697,260 won (=10 million won - 11,302,740 won) and damages for delay calculated by the rate of 19% per annum from April 18, 2018 to the date of full payment.

B. As to this, Defendant C did not participate in the preparation of the instant loan certificate or did not contact the Plaintiff, and Defendant C asserted that Defendant D had prepared a loan certificate and affixed the Defendant seal, but Defendant C’s above assertion is not acceptable on the ground that there is no ground to acknowledge it.

3. The plaintiff's claim is justified. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is accepted.