1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 20,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 30% per annum from March 17, 2011 to the day of complete payment.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. In full view of the entries in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2 as well as the overall purport of the pleadings, it is recognized that the Defendant prepared on March 17, 201 a loan certificate stating that “the amount of rent Nos. 20,000,000, repayment deadline of 20,000, repayment deadline of December 30, 201, 30, 3% of all legal costs and repayment amount at the time of repayment, and 50% of the principal shall be added to the Plaintiff.”

B. If the loan is claimed, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the agreed interest rate or delay damages at the rate of 30% per annum, which is the highest interest rate as stipulated in Article 2(1) of the former Interest Limitation Act (amended by Act No. 1227, Jan. 14, 2014; hereinafter the same shall apply) from March 17, 201.

C. The Plaintiff seeking penalty is also seeking payment of KRW 10,000,000 as a penalty for penalty for breach of contract.

However, the agreement of a penalty is presumed to be a liquidated damages (Article 398(4) of the Civil Act). Therefore, in order for the penalty to be interpreted as a penalty for breach of contract, special circumstances should be asserted and proved. Not only the name or phrase used in relation to the penalty at the time of concluding the contract, but also the economic status of the contracting party, details and contents of the contract, details and negotiation process of the agreement of the penalty, the principal purpose of the agreement of the contracting party, the nature of the obligation to guarantee performance through the penalty, whether the party can separately claim damages other than the penalty in the event of nonperformance of obligation, whether the contract can be claimed in addition to the penalty, the amount of the penalty or the ratio of the amount of the penalty to the total amount of the obligation, the size of

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da65973, Jul. 14, 2016). The phrase “legal expenses” cited by the Plaintiff in the instant case is alone an agreement on penalty of this case.