1. The Defendant’s KRW 100,000,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual interest from August 1, 201 to July 31, 2014, and the following.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings as to the cause of the claim Gap's evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and evidence Nos. 3-1 and 2, the defendant issued one promissory note in Seoul Special Metropolitan City around Jun. 17, 201, which became the recipient, the plaintiff, the face value of KRW 100 million, the due date of July 31, 201, the place of payment, the place of payment, and the place of issuance, and the fact that the plaintiff presented the payment of the said promissory note to the defendant on July 31, 201, but refused to pay, is recognized.

In light of the above facts, the Defendant, as an issuer of the above Promissory Notes, is obligated to pay the Plaintiff, who is a lawful holder, 10 million won of the Promissory Notes and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum prescribed by the Civil Act from August 1, 2011 to July 31, 2014, which is the day following the due date of the payment of the Promissory Notes, and 20% per annum prescribed by the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of full payment.

2. The defendant's assertion that the defendant issued the Promissory Notes under the plaintiff's forced or strong pressure, but there is no evidence to acknowledge the defendant's assertion. Thus, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is justified and acceptable.