1. The Defendant’s KRW 300,000,000 as well as the annual rate of KRW 5% from March 17, 2019 to December 6, 2019, and the following.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. In around 2012, the Plaintiff came to know of the Defendant and Japan, and lived with each other in an apartment complex located in ancient City from April 2014.

B. On June 19, 2015, the Plaintiff lent KRW 300,000,000 to the Defendant for interest without setting the due date.

C. The Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to take the Hague around March 28, 2017. On April 28, 2017, the Plaintiff immediately thereafter withdrawn the amount of KRW 25,000,000 from his/her own deposit account, plus KRW 40,000,000 from May 2, 2017 (i.e., the exchange rate of KRW 1,000,67,68,000 from November 19, 2018 when applying the exchange rate of KRW 40,268,00 from its own deposit account) to the Defendant in cash.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's summary of the plaintiff's assertion was leased to the defendant a total of KRW 700,268,000 (= KRW 400,000,000 converted into Korean won). Thus, the defendant is obliged to pay the plaintiff a total of KRW 700,268,000 and delay damages.

3. Determination as to the cause of action

A. According to the facts found above, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 300,000,000,000 per annum under the Civil Act from March 17, 2019 to December 6, 2019, where a considerable period from February 17, 2019, which served on the Defendant with a copy of the complaint containing the purport of demanding the payment of KRW 300,000,000,000, and the payment for delay calculated at the rate of 12% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day to the date of full payment, as the Plaintiff seeks.

Although the defendant asserts that the plaintiff paid all the principal and interest of the above loan, there is no evidence to acknowledge it.

On the other hand, if the repayment period is not fixed in a monetary loan contract, the lender shall demand the return thereof by fixing a reasonable period pursuant to Article 603 (2) of the Civil Code, and the borrower shall be reasonable from the time when he receives the peremptory notice