1. The Defendant shall pay KRW 10 million to the Plaintiff the annual interest rate of KRW 15% from July 19, 2016 to the day of full payment.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. Facts of recognition 1) Defendant’s assistant intervenor’s KRW 100 million from the Plaintiff on September 25, 2015 (hereinafter “instant loan”).

(1) On February 24, 2016, the Defendant: (a) borrowed 100 million won (10,000,000 won) from the Plaintiff; (b) the repayment date is January 20, 2016; and (c) the agreement is in four copies per month; and (d) the Intervenor’s assistant offers as security the right to receive the purchase price of the “Ulsanbuk-gu,” the actual owner; (b) on February 24, 2016, the Defendant affixed a seal on the following documents (No. 2-1, hereinafter referred to as “the instant loan certificate”); and (c) issued a certificate of personal seal impression (for the purpose of use: the guarantor) with respect to the instant loan debt owed by the Defendant Intervenor against the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff.

Loaner: A joint and several surety for the defendant: The loan money for the defendant: One hundred million won (100,000,000 won)

1. The Defendant Intervenor borrowed the above amount from the Plaintiff on September 25, 2015.

2. The repayment date of the above loan will be repaid from January 20, 2016 to June 30 of the same year.

3. If the Plaintiff is unable to repay, the borrower and the joint guarantor will not take any legal action when the Plaintiff makes a civil or criminal action.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

B. In a case where the authenticity of an adjudication document is recognized, the existence of a juristic act which forms the content must be recognized unless there are special circumstances to the contrary, where the existence and content of the declaration of intent indicated in the document are clear and acceptable.

(See Supreme Court Decision 200Da38602 Decided October 13, 200, etc.). According to the above legal principles and the above facts of recognition, the Defendant borrowed the instant loan against the Plaintiff by the Defendant’s Intervenor on February 24, 2016.