1. Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the amount ordered to be paid below is revoked, and that part is revoked.

Basic Facts

On May 196, the Plaintiff, who operated the main points, has lent money to the Defendant who operated the main points by up to 1997, including lending KRW 50 million to the Defendant who operated the main points, and has received a partial repayment from the Defendant.

In relation to the above monetary transaction on April 25, 2005, the Plaintiff was prepared with a loan certificate stating that “the Defendant borrowed KRW 40 million from the Plaintiff as of April 25, 2005,” from the Defendant.

On the bottom of the above loan certificate, it is indicated as the debtor's indication that the above loan certificate "C Gab and cafeteria B (Defendant)" (hereinafter the above loan certificate "the loan certificate of this case", and the above loan certificate "the debt of April 25, 2005" "the principal debt of April 2006"). The plaintiff set the interest rate of 240,000 won (36% per annum) on December 14, 2006, and the due date of payment on March 20, 2007, and 8 million won on March 20, 2007 (hereinafter "the debt of the interest rate of this case") and thereafter, the plaintiff lent the defendant a total of 9 million won as follows without setting the interest and the due date.

In other words, the Plaintiff made a payment to the Defendant on March 2, 2007, KRW 3 million on July 30, 2008, and KRW 4 million on October 24, 2008 without setting the interest and the due date for payment (hereinafter “each of the instant non-interest obligations”). The Defendant paid KRW 18,120,000 to the Plaintiff on a monthly basis, as shown in the attached Table 2 and the attached Table 2, immediately after the date on which the instant non-interest obligation occurred, from January 19, 2007 to November 14, 2016, the Defendant paid KRW 8,120,000 to the Plaintiff on a monthly basis.

On the other hand, on February 7, 2014, the Defendant filed a petition for bankruptcy and immunity with the Daegu District Court 494, 2014 at the end of 2014, 494.

On November 4, 2014, the above court decided to grant immunity to the defendant, and the above decision to grant immunity became final and conclusive, and the decision to grant immunity does not contain any obligation to the plaintiff in the list of creditors entitled to grant immunity (hereinafter referred to as "the decision to grant immunity of this case"). [The grounds for recognition] does not dispute.