1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 25,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from December 24, 2015 to the date of full payment.

1. On March 20, 201, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement to sell alcoholic beverages to the Defendant who operates a general restaurant business (hereinafter “instant business”) with the trade name “C” in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, and agreed to pay KRW 30 million on the 17th day of each month during the 20-month period (hereinafter “the loan agreement of this case”) may be recognized by taking into account the absence of any dispute between the parties or the entire purport of the statement and oral argument, and the Plaintiff received KRW 5 million from the Defendant to pay the loan principal under the loan agreement of this case. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 25 million with the loan principal borrowed under the loan agreement of this case and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% from the date of delivery of a copy of the claim and a copy of the application for change after the maturity of the loan agreement of this case by 201.25% from the date of completion of the lawsuit.

2. On September 7, 2011, the Defendant asserted that the Defendant transferred all of the instant business to D around September 7, 201, and D, while acquiring the instant business, took over the Defendant’s obligation under the loan agreement, exempted the Defendant from liability, and the Plaintiff consented, thus, the Plaintiff’s claim cannot be complied with.

On the other hand, Article 454 of the Civil Act provides that, in cases where a third party assumes an obligation by a contract with the debtor and discharges the debtor's obligation, the obligation shall take effect against the obligee only with the consent of the obligee. Thus, in cases where the obligee does not obtain the consent of the obligee, even if the obligor and the underwriter agree to assume an obligation with the discharge, it shall not have the effect such as the takeover of performance,

Supreme Court Decision 2009Da88303 Decided May 24, 2012