1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B’s KRW 27 million and for this, 5% per annum from February 23, 2019 to February 4, 2020.

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant C is the mother of Defendant B.

B. On August 8, 2018, Defendant B drafted a loan certificate (No. 1; hereinafter “instant loan certificate”) with the following content to the Plaintiff.

【Ground for recognition: A without dispute, A evidence No. 1

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion ① KRW 27 million as stated in the instant loan certificate that the Defendants lent to the Defendants, and ② KRW 9 million as equivalent to the Plaintiff’s direct performance of construction works in the course of opening entertainment taverns open to the entertainment tavern operated by the Defendants, ③ the Defendants were liable to pay the Plaintiff KRW 36 million, but the Defendants failed to perform their obligations to pay the Plaintiff KRW 10 million for mental damage.

3. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the facts found earlier as stated in the instant loan certificate, Defendant B agreed to reimburse the Plaintiff KRW 27 million, and thus, Defendant B is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 27 million.

Meanwhile, Defendant C, along with Defendant B, recognized the fact of borrowing KRW 10 million out of the money stated in the instant loan certificate (see, e.g., the written reply dated February 28, 2019). As such, Defendant B is jointly and severally obligated to pay KRW 10 million out of the said KRW 27 million with Defendant B.

The Plaintiff asserts that Defendant C is also liable for the remainder of KRW 17 million as stated in the instant loan certificate. However, Defendant C denies it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that Defendant C is liable for the said KRW 17 million, and there is no reason to believe that the above assertion is reasonable.

B. The Plaintiff’s statement of KRW 9 million No. 1 in the amount corresponding to the price that the Defendants directly performed during the process of opening the entertainment taverns open to the public is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff performed a direct construction work equivalent to KRW 9 million in the course of opening the entertainment tavern open to the Defendants’ operation, and that there was an agreement to hold the Defendants responsible for it, and that is otherwise acceptable.