Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the amount of additional payment shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

(1) On October 23, 2015, the Plaintiff agreed to receive KRW 9,00,00,000 from the Defendant as “interest of KRW 60,00 per month until he/she has repaid the principal” (hereinafter “the instant loan”). (b) The Defendant paid KRW 1,00,000 on October 31, 205, and KRW 200 on November 21, 2015, ② KRW 00, KRW 00, KRW 000, KRW 000 on December 13, 2015, KRW 00, KRW 00, KRW 000, KRW 600, KRW 00 on December 13, 2015, KRW 00, KRW 40, KRW 60,000 on January 20, 2016, KRW 600 on June 16, 2016, KRW 7,000 on June 20, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Article 2(1) of the Interest Limitation Act provides that "to be prescribed by Presidential Decree within the extent not exceeding 25 percent per annum of the maximum interest rate on the sub-lease." Article 2(3) of the same Act provides that "any interest under a contract exceeds the maximum interest rate stipulated in paragraph (1) shall be null and void." Article 2(4) of the same Act provides that "where a debtor has voluntarily paid interest exceeding the maximum interest rate, the amount equivalent to the interest paid in excess shall be appropriated for the principal and may be claimed for return when the original is extinguished."

In addition, “Regulations on the highest interest rate under Article 2(1) of the Interest Limitation Act”, which is Presidential Decree, provides for the highest interest rate of 25% per annum in the case of a loan of money concluded from July 15, 2014 to February 7, 2018 (see, e.g., Article 2(1) of the Interest Limitation Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 28413, Nov. 7, 2017); Articles 1 and 2 of the Addenda (Presidential Decree No. 25376, Jun. 11, 2014); and Articles 1 and 2 of the Addenda (Presidential Decree No. 28413, Nov. 7, 2017) of the aforementioned Addenda). Therefore, the foregoing paragraph 1-B.