1. The Defendant’s KRW 37,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from January 1, 2008 to May 25, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

1. The facts subsequent to the facts of recognition do not conflict between the parties, or may be found in the entries in Gap evidence 1 and 2 together with the purport of the entire pleadings.

On April 7, 2006, the Plaintiff lent a total of KRW 37 million to the Defendant by remitting KRW 5 million to the Defendant’s account, KRW 15 million on May 8, 2006, KRW 15 million on May 25, 2006, KRW 15 million on October 28, 2006, and KRW 37 million on the method of remitting KRW 2 million to the Defendant’s account (= KRW 5 million).

B. On July 6, 2007, the Defendant borrowed a total of KRW 37 million from the Plaintiff as above, and prepared a loan certificate to the Plaintiff on December 31, 2007 and delivered it to the Plaintiff.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts finding as to the plaintiff's claim, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 37 million won and damages for delay from January 1, 2008.

B. The Defendant’s argument regarding the Defendant’s assertion: (a) the Defendant paid the Defendant’s monthly wage to the Plaintiff by the method of directly paying the Defendant’s monthly wage to the extent of three months; and (b) the Defendant paid KRW 200,000 to the Plaintiff around 2010; (c) however, there is no evidence to acknowledge this, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

C. The Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 37,00,000 won and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum prescribed by the Civil Act until May 25, 2016 and 15% per annum prescribed by the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day to the day of full payment, which is clear that the original copy of the instant payment order was served on the Defendant from January 1, 2008.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.