1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 37,213,424 as well as KRW 36,00,000 among them, from February 4, 2016 to the date of full payment.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On November 11, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a credit transaction agreement by setting the maximum interest rate at 17% per annum, setting the credit transaction rate at 17% per annum.

At the time of the conclusion of the above credit transaction agreement, the defendant approved that the "Basic Terms and Conditions for Credit Transactions" apply to the above credit transaction.

B. On November 11, 2014, the Plaintiff extended the term of the credit transaction agreement by setting the term of the said credit transaction agreement at 113 billion won, the term of the credit extension period at 6.21% as of November 11, 2015, and the interest rate at 6.21% as of the base rate. On November 11, 2015, the credit extension period at 37 million won, the term of the credit extension period at 12.3% as of November 11, 2016, and the term of the said credit transaction agreement was extended by setting the term of the said credit transaction agreement at 12.3% as of the base rate.

C. As of February 3, 2016, the Defendant did not pay the principal and interest stipulated in the agreement as to the above obligation, thereby losing the benefit of time. As of February 3, 2016, the Defendant’s debt amount against the Plaintiff is the total of KRW 36 million of principal, KRW 1,174,30 of ordinary interest, KRW 39,094 of overdue interest, and KRW 37,213,424 of overdue interest.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff delay damages at the rate of 15% per annum from February 4, 2016 to the date of full payment with respect to the principal and interest of loan KRW 37,213,424 and the principal of loan KRW 36 million.

On December 28, 2015, the defendant filed an application for individual rehabilitation with the plaintiff on the list of creditors stating the claim for the above loan against the plaintiff (the Jeonju District Court 2015da28699), and argued to the effect that the repayment is made in good faith after the decision to authorize the repayment plan was made in the above individual rehabilitation procedure. However, even if this judgment is finalized, the defendant is authorized in the individual rehabilitation procedure, if the repayment plan is authorized in the individual rehabilitation procedure.