1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 50,136,985 and KRW 50,000,000, out of the above amounts, from June 4, 2015 to the day of full payment.

1. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 7 (including additional numbers) as to the cause of the claim, the facts of the reasons for the claim are recognized.

According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the interest or delay damages calculated at the rate of 25% per annum from June 4, 2015 to the date of full payment, as to the agreed principal and interest of KRW 50,136,985, and the agreed principal of KRW 50,000,000 among the agreed principal and interest of KRW 50,00,000.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant asserted that, among the principal amount of the instant agreement KRW 50,000,000, Nonparty C paid KRW 30,000,000 to the Plaintiff on behalf of the Defendant on September 5, 2014, in total, KRW 10,000,000 on the part of the Defendant, on the part of Nonparty C, for the Plaintiff on behalf of the Defendant, but the Defendant’s assertion is not acceptable on the ground that there is no evidence to acknowledge this.

B. Also, the defendant is the defendant.

As to the remainder of C’s subrogated payment, 20,000,000 won remaining after the payment of the interest, the Plaintiff paid each of the principal on April 16, 2015, with the Plaintiff having exempted the Defendant from interest and having paid only the principal. As such, the Defendant asserted that the amount to be repaid to the Plaintiff is KRW 3,00,000 (=20,000,000 - 10,000,000 - 7,000,000,000). However, there is no evidence to support that the Plaintiff had agreed to reduce or exempt interest to the Defendant.

Rather, the above A.

As seen in the foregoing, it is difficult to recognize that the Defendant paid KRW 30,000,000 on the behalf of C as above. As such, the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to have agreed to reduce or exempt interest on April 16, 2015, which the Defendant repaid to the Plaintiff. Thus, it is obvious that if the Defendant appropriated KRW 10,000,000 on the part of the Defendant, and the principal and interest of KRW 7,00,000 on June 4, 2015, in the order of the principal and interest as alleged by the Plaintiff, the remainder of the principal and interest remains as alleged by the Plaintiff.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is ordered to accept it.