1. The Defendant shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 34,089,949 as well as KRW 11,507,289 as to the Plaintiff from February 8, 2018.

1. Determination

A. According to the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 and Eul evidence Nos. 1, the plaintiff lent 30 million won to the defendant on May 10, 2010 by setting the interest rate of 48% per annum (one million won per month) and on May 21, 2011, and C's joint guarantee. The defendant repaid a total of 22,257,300 won as shown in the annexed sheet from May 20, 2010 to December 21, 2010, the defendant asserted that he/she repaid a total of 2,2250,000 won in the annexed sheet, and the attached statement of repayment is total of 22,257,300 won based on evidence No. 1, and the amount claimed by the defendant appears to be based on evidence No. 1. 1.

Therefore, in excess of this, 5 million won and 5.5 million won stated in Eul evidence No. 4 are not included in the scope of performance claimed by the defendant, but only the particulars stated in Eul evidence No. 1 are recognized as the content of performance.

A. The Plaintiff seeks interest payment calculated on the basis of the highest interest rate under the Interest Limitation Act. If the amount repaid by the Defendant is appropriated in the order of principal from the interest calculated on the basis of the highest interest rate under the Interest Limitation Act, the remaining principal and interest as of February 7, 2018 are KRW 34,089,949, including principal and interest KRW 11,507,289,289 and interest KRW 22,582,660.

Therefore, the Defendant is jointly and severally liable with C to pay damages for delay calculated by the rate of 24% per annum on the interest rate under the Interest Limitation Act sought by the Plaintiff within the maximum of 48% per annum from February 8, 2018 to the date of full payment, with respect to the remaining principal and interest 34,089,949 won and the principal 11,507,289 won.

B. As to this, the Plaintiff asserted that the amount exceeding KRW 1.2 million from the amount set forth in the [Attachment 3, 6, 10, 11] and the amount set forth in the [Attachment 4, 7, and 8] was appropriated for the repayment of another claim against the Defendant, but there is no evidence to identify the existence and scope of other claims.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is not accepted.

2. If so, the plaintiff's claim is accepted within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as they are without merit.