1. The Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff is based on the notarial deed No. 217, No. 2017, No. 2017.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 2, 2017, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 50 million from the Defendant on August 31, 2017, with a maturity of KRW 20 million as of August 31, 2017, and at the rate of delay interest rate of KRW 20% per annum. The Plaintiff’s notarial deeds of debt repayment (Quasi-Loan for Consumption) contract as stipulated in paragraph (1) of the Disposition (hereinafter “this case’s notarial deeds”).

B. The Plaintiff repaid the Defendant KRW 50 million on April 6, 2018.

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

2. The plaintiff asserts that since the defendant paid KRW 50 million to the defendant and agreed to receive all claims based on the Notarial Deed of this case, compulsory execution based on the Notarial Deed of this case shall be denied.

In this regard, the defendant asserts that the payment of KRW 50 million should be first appropriated for damages for delay.

3. First of all, as alleged by the Plaintiff, whether the Defendant agreed to receive the payment of KRW 50 million with the principal and interest based on the notarial deed of this case as the principal and interest on the notarial deed of this case as the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

Therefore, 50 million won repaid by the Plaintiff should be first appropriated for 5,972,602 won (50 million won x 0.2 x 218/365) incurred from September 1, 2017 to April 6, 2018, the repayment date, as claimed by the Defendant, and the remainder should be appropriated for 44,027,398 won.

Ultimately, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay KRW 5,972,602 of the principal of the borrowed amount based on the instant notarial deed and damages for delay at a rate of 20% per annum from April 7, 2018 to the date of full payment. Therefore, compulsory execution based on the instant notarial deed shall not be permitted for the portion exceeding the above money.

4. The plaintiff's claim is justified within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.