1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 34 million and the Plaintiff’s 17.5% per annum from May 21, 2007 to September 23, 2014; and (b) October 21, 2014.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 1, 2006, the Defendant borrowed KRW 84 million from the Plaintiff, and repaid KRW 50 million among them.

B. On May 25, 2007, the Defendant agreed with the Plaintiff on December 31, 2007, the due date of repayment of KRW 34 million among the borrowed money, with KRW 17.5% per annum from May 21, 2007, and with KRW 17.5% per annum from May 21, 2007 (hereinafter the instant agreement), and on the same day, the notarial deed of the debt repayment contract (hereinafter the instant notarial deed) as mentioned above was prepared.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. In accordance with the instant agreement, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the interest or delay damages calculated at the rate of 17.5% per annum, the agreed interest rate or the delay damages rate, from May 21, 2007 to September 23, 2014, which is the date of application for payment order, and the interest or delay damages calculated at the rate of 20% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from October 21, 2014 to the date of full payment after the delivery of payment order.

(The plaintiff did not claim damages for delay from the date following the date of application for payment order until the date of service of payment order).

The Defendant agreed that the Plaintiff shall be reimbursed KRW 50 million out of the above loan amounting to KRW 84 million and give up the remaining claims. The instant notarial deed is prepared in a false manner to show the Plaintiff’s father’s father at the Plaintiff’s request. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge this.

3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is justified and acceptable.