1. The defendant's KRW 160,000,000 and its amount are 7.5% per annum from February 1, 2009 to July 12, 2019 to the plaintiff.

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. If the purport of the entire pleadings is added to the statement in subparagraph 1, the defendant lent the amount of KRW 160 million on December 17, 2008 to the debtor (the plaintiff) on December 17, 2008, and borrowed it from the debtor. Article 2 of the same Act is as follows: (a) KRW 50 million on June 30, 2009; and (b) KRW 50 million on December 30, 2010, KRW 60 million on June 30, 2010, and KRW 60 million on June 30, 2010. Since interest on Article 3 is determined as KRW 7.5% per annum, the defendant is not aware that the defendant actually paid the above money on December 30, 2008, and there is no reason to acknowledge the content of the notarial deed that the defendant actually paid the money to the defendant on June 30, 2009, the evidence presented by the defendant cannot be found to exist.

Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 10 million won and 7.5% agreement interest per annum from February 1, 2009 to July 12, 2019, the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, and 12% interest per annum from the next day to the day of full payment under the Litigation Promotion Act.

2. Judgment on the defendant's defense

A. The defendant, around 2006, set up a false notarial deed on the ground that around 2006, the defendant would operate an adult entertainment room with the plaintiff's husband, and received a partner's money from C, and suffered losses as a result of regulating the adult entertainment room, but C would only show it to the plaintiff, so the above notarial deed is invalid. However, the evidence submitted by the defendant alone is the same.