1. The Defendant’s KRW 72,00,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from May 16, 2015 to July 8, 2015.

Comprehensively taking account of the purport of each statement in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including branch numbers), the plaintiff, upon receipt of a proposal from the defendant on July 21, 2014 that the sum of the profits therefrom would be paid KRW 120 million from the defendant to September 2014, the plaintiff agreed to pay the amount of KRW 100 million. Upon receipt of such proposal, the defendant remitted the amount of KRW 80 million to the defendant on July 2, 2014, and KRW 20 million on July 31, 2014; the defendant partially repaid to the plaintiff; the defendant partially repaid to the plaintiff; according to the "written statement of non-payment" prepared on April 29, 2015 between the plaintiff and the defendant on April 29, 2015, the defendant should additionally pay interest on the remainder of KRW 70 million,000,0000,000 due to the delay in payment."

Therefore, according to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the remaining 72 million won among the above amount which is promised to repay to the plaintiff, 5% per annum under the Civil Act from May 16, 2015 to the day following the due date for payment, and 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of full payment.

[Objection] The Defendant alleged to the effect that the Plaintiff did not lend money to the Defendant, but rather granted money as investment, and that it was unreasonable to not bear loss burden in investment. However, the Plaintiff used “loan” as the cause of claim upon filing the original lawsuit of this case. On October 12, 2015, the Plaintiff changed the cause of claim to “investment” (the Defendant did not respond to the Plaintiff’s request for change of the purport of claim and the cause of claim stated therein even though having received the delivery of the Plaintiff’s request for change of claim.

In principle, the existence and contents of the expression of intent as stated in the language and text are the so-called "written cash custody certificate" submitted in this case.