1. As to the Plaintiff KRW 87,428,00 among the above money and KRW 205,798,000, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 87,428,00 from October 31, 2017, and KRW 62,040.

1. As shown in the attached Form, Loneion Korea Co., Ltd. issued and delivered an electronic bill of KRW 205,798,000 in total amount of face value of the bill (hereinafter “instant bill”) to the Defendant as to the cause of the claim. The fact that the Defendant exempted the preparation of the non-payment refusal certificate in each of the instant bill as shown in the attached Form and delivered it to the Plaintiff by endorsement is recognized by taking account of the parties’ dispute between them and the whole purport of each of the statements and arguments set forth in subparagraphs A and 7 (including the serial number).

Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to pay the payment of the bill and the damages for delay to the Plaintiff.

2. Judgment on the defendant's defense, etc.

A. The defendant asserts that the defendant's act of the bill of exchange is revoked because the plaintiff deceivings the defendant and made the defendant endorsement on each of the bill of exchange in this case by stating that "it is necessary for the defendant to correct the bill of exchange in addition to claiming the amount of the bill of exchange in this case."

However, the evidence presented by the Defendant alone is not sufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff, by deceiving the Defendant, made an endorsement on the bill of this case, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

B. The defendant asserts that the sum of the face value of each of the bills of this case is KRW 205,798,000, or that the defendant had already paid KRW 16,174,790 as interest when the plaintiff received the discount of the bill from the plaintiff on each of the bills of this case.

However, unless there is any specific agreement between the parties, it cannot be deemed that the amount paid as interest or commission fees is deducted from the face value of the bill after the difference. Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. According to the conclusion, with respect to the Plaintiff’s total sum of KRW 205,798,000 and KRW 87,428,00,00 (=15,40,000 + KRW 22,00,000 + KRW 7,568,000 + KRW 20,460,000 + KRW 22,000,000 + KRW 22,00,000,000 on the respective payment date), the Defendant’s payment date.