1. The Defendant’s annual interest in KRW 160,279,932 and KRW 104,949,00 among the Plaintiff, from July 2, 2015 to July 27, 2015.

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The facts of recognition 1) E.S. E. S. E.D. (hereinafter “E.D. E.I.D.”)

) The business of newly constructing and selling D officetels on the ground B or C of the Yeonsu-gu Incheon Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant sales business”).

(2) The Plaintiff entered into an agreement with Edidrid, Korea Asset Trust Co., Ltd., a trustee who entered into a trust agreement with Edidrid and the instant sales business, and the Esco Construction Co., Ltd., a contractor for the instant sales business. (2) The Plaintiff entered into an agreement with Edidrid, Korea Asset Trust Co., Ltd., Ltd., and Spoco Construction (hereinafter “Edidrid, etc.”).

3) On October 18, 2009, the Plaintiff entered into a loan transaction agreement between the Defendant who purchased part of the instant officetel and the Defendant who purchased it on December 10, 2009 (hereinafter “the instant loan transaction agreement”). The loan transaction agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant (hereinafter “instant loan transaction agreement”) stipulated on December 31, 201 as the loan principal, the loan principal 104,949,000 won, and the starting date of the loan.

(2) In accordance with the above agreement, on December 10, 2009, the above loan (hereinafter “instant loan”) was concluded.

(4) The due date for the instant loan has arrived upon the expiration of the loan term due to the expiration of the loan term, and the contractual delay interest rate from January 4, 2012, the following day after the date of calculating damages for delay (the date of loss of the due date), is 14.05% per annum.

5) As of July 1, 2015, the sum of the principal and interest of this case as of July 1, 2015 (i.e., KRW 159,643,242 (i.e., the loan principal plus KRW 54,69,00 in interest rate of KRW 104,94,00 in interest rate of KRW 54,69,242). Meanwhile, according to the bank credit transaction basic agreement applicable to the loan transaction in this case, the Plaintiff shall bear the Plaintiff’s expenses incurred by the Plaintiff to preserve the Plaintiff’s claim against the obligor due to the obligor’s nonperformance. Legal expenses incurred by the Plaintiff

[Reasons for Recognition] The facts that there is no dispute, and the statements in Gap evidence 1 to 3.