1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 56,03,961 and KRW 31,962,434 from September 18, 2015 to the day of full payment.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The Plaintiff loaned KRW 70,000,000 to the Defendant on March 30, 2003, with the due date set as KRW 18% per annum. On August 4, 2010, the loan amounting to KRW 40,000,000, the due date was changed to the fluctuation rate (1.9% per annum) on August 4, 201, and the due date was changed to the fluctuation rate (1.9% per annum).

(hereinafter referred to as "the instant loan agreement". (b)

The Defendant lost the benefit of May 9, 201 due to the occurrence of bankruptcy, one of the grounds for the loss of benefit under the instant loan contract.

C. As of September 17, 2015, the obligation of principal and interest under the instant loan agreement is KRW 56,413,554 (i.e., principal and interest KRW 31,962,434 (i.e., principal and interest KRW 31,962,434) from March 30, 201 to May 9, 2011, the interest rate of KRW 408,475 (No. 408,475) accrued from May 10, 201 to September 17, 2015, total damages for delay incurred from the principal and interest accrued from May 3, 2011 to May 9, 2011, and the rate of damages for delay is 1,118 won per annum.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 through 7 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings]

D. According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff damages for delay from September 18, 2015, which is the day following the start-up day of the final damages for delay, with respect to KRW 31,962,434, out of KRW 56,413,54.

2. Judgment on the defendant's defense

A. The defendant asserts that the principal and interest obligation under the loan contract of this case expired by prescription.

B. First, we examine the principal under the instant loan agreement and the damages for delay incurred as to the principal from May 10, 201 to September 17, 2015.

In accordance with Article 64 of the Commercial Act, the extinctive prescription of a loan extended by a bank to the act of business and damages for delay after the due date is five years.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2006Da2940 Decided March 14, 2008). The fact that the date of loss of the Plaintiff’s benefit of time was May 9, 201 is the same as seen earlier, and the Plaintiff’s filing of the instant lawsuit before five years elapse from the said date is the calendar.