1. As to the Plaintiff’s KRW 60,002,123 and KRW 60,000 among them, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 60,00,000 from November 17, 2016 to December 15, 2016.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments as to the cause of claim Gap evidence Nos. 1-1 and 2, it is recognized that the defendant: (a) borrowed interest of KRW 40,000,000 from the plaintiff on August 22, 2014 (payment on August 25, 2015); (b) interest rate of KRW 20,000 on August 22, 2015; and (c) interest rate of KRW 4% (payment on January 2, 2015; (d) interest rate of KRW 20,00,000 on July 2, 2015; and (e) interest rate of KRW 25,00 on the loan (hereinafter “each of the instant loan certificates”); and (e) as long as the disposal documents are deemed to have been authentic, the court recognizes the existence of the remainder and damages for delay as stated by the plaintiff, barring any clear and acceptable evidence, and thus, has to be paid by the defendant to the plaintiff (see, 15, 190, 15,60.5).60

2. Determination as to the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant asserts that: (a) the actual borrower of KRW 40,00,00 among each of the instant loan certificates is C; and (b) C agreed to succeed to the Defendant’s obligation for the loan, and that the Plaintiff prepared a promissory note on KRW 60,000,000 on each of the above loan certificates to the Plaintiff; (c) thereby, the effect of each of the instant loan certificates drawn up between the Defendant and the Plaintiff was lost; and (d) thus, the Plaintiff’s claim is unreasonable.

In light of the fact that C claims that the Defendant was the actual borrower, and the relationship between the Defendant and C is difficult to believe, as it is, the statement of No. 5, which seems consistent with the Defendant’s assertion, is that C is the actual borrower, and that C is difficult to believe, according to the statement of No. 2.