1. The defendant shall pay 25,00,000 won to the plaintiff and 20% per annum from January 9, 2002 to the day of complete payment.

1. According to the evidence No. 1-1, No. 2, and No. 3 of the judgment as to the cause of the claim, it can be acknowledged that the plaintiff lent 20,000 won to the defendant on March 20, 200, and 5 million won on April 12, 200, respectively, and the defendant recognizes that the interest rate for the borrowed money is 20% per annum.

According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the total amount of the above loans of KRW 25 million and interest at the rate of 20% per annum from April 13, 2000 to the date of full payment, as claimed by the plaintiff.

(Plaintiffs asserted that there was an interest agreement of at least 30% per annum, but there is no evidence to acknowledge this, this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is groundless). 2. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion

A. The defendant asserts that the amount of the credit was paid to the plaintiff on June 1, 2004, KRW 17 million on August 3, 2004, KRW 500,000 on March 14, 2005, KRW 4.7 million on May 16, 2005, and KRW 4 million on May 16, 2005, and paid to C at the plaintiff's request, and paid KRW 4 million to D on April 2006.

The plaintiff was paid a total of KRW 4.7 million by May 16, 2005, and the defendant paid a total of KRW 4.7 million through D around 2006, there is no dispute between the parties that the defendant paid a total of KRW 4 million among the loans of this case by the plaintiff around 2006.

(C) Since there is no evidence to prove that repayment to C is a repayment to the Plaintiff’s loan, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is groundless.

Thus, the above total amount of KRW 8.7 million was appropriated for the interest amounting to KRW 8,712,328 from April 13, 2000 to January 8, 2002 (the interest amounting to KRW 8,712,328). Thus, the defendant's defense is justified within the above scope of recognition.

B. The defendant's assertion that the extinctive prescription period has expired is ten years after the date of lending the plaintiff's loan.

However, as seen earlier, the Defendant’s repayment of the interest on the loan by May 16, 2005, the extinctive prescription of the loan claim was interrupted at the time of the above.