1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 65,00,000 and KRW 50,000 among them, from July 5, 2007, and KRW 15,00,000.

1. The plaintiff asserted that ① on July 4, 2006, the amount of KRW 50 million shall be determined on July 4, 2007 as the due date, and the interest at which the interest rate for time deposit is applied until the due date or when the due date is in excess of the due date shall be set and lent to the defendant by issuing five copies of cashier’s checks. ② The amount of KRW 15 million on September 11, 2006 shall be determined as of October 10, 2006; ② the interest at which the interest rate for time deposit is applied until the due date or when the due date is over the due date is set and lent to the post office account in the name of the defendant designated by the defendant. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the above loans to the plaintiff the total amount of KRW 65 million and delay damages.

2. On July 4, 2006, the Defendant’s judgment on the assertion of the loan amounting to KRW 50 million on or before July 4, 2006, does not conflict between the parties to a dispute over the fact that: (a) around July 4, 2006, the Defendant drafted and delivered the loan certificate stating that “The amount is KRW :00,000,000: from July 4, 2006 to July 4, 2007 (1) interest: interest-free interest; and (b) bank term deposit interest rate shall apply in cases where the Plaintiff fails to meet the requirements for short-term loan; (c) the principal shall borrow the above amount and promise to repay it after one year.” (hereinafter “the instant loan certificate”).

In general, in a case where the authenticity of a disposal document is recognized, the existence of a legal act is recognized unless there are clear and acceptable circumstances that deny the existence of the expression of intent indicated in the document and the content thereof (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 89Meu16505, Mar. 23, 1990). The above recognition facts are as follows: (a) each description of evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5 (including the serial number), witness D’s testimony, witness E’s witness E’s testimony; and (b) the following facts or circumstances, namely, ① on July 4, 2006, the Plaintiff, at the central point of Korea, three copies of a cashier’s checks, one million won.