1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 30,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from May 21, 2016 to the day of complete payment.

Basic Facts

The defendant borrowed KRW 35,00,000 from the plaintiff around 2014.

around May 2014, the Defendant got phone from C while getting on and off a vehicle with the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff called 5,000,000 won by phones.

The defendant paid 10 million won to the plaintiff on August 6, 2014.

On August 18, 2014, the Defendant rendered a loan certificate (Evidence A 1) to the Plaintiff as follows:

The interest rate of KRW 30,00,000 shall be 1% per annum (400,000 per annum) and shall be paid on the 10th day of each month.

The due date shall be August 2015.

On August 18, 2014: 3,00,000 won in advance: 2,000,000 won in advance: 30,000,000 won in advance: 40,000,000 won in advance: August 16, 2014; Defendant C: 5,000,000 won in advance; the remaining amount of KRW 10,000 in advance:30,000 in advance:30,000 in advance; (a) there is no dispute with the Plaintiff; (b) according to the facts in advance of determination on the ground of the purport of the entire pleadings; (c) the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% in advance from May 21, 2016 to the day after the original payment order was delivered to the Defendant; and (d) pursuant to the Plaintiff’s request, the record clearly revealed that it is the day after the original payment order was delivered to the Defendant.

In regard to this, the defendant made the plaintiff's 5,00,000 won, which was put to C, but the defendant borrowed money from the defendant, and the plaintiff made a signature and made a signature on the certificate of loan (Evidence A A No. 1) that the plaintiff is not liable to the defendant. The defendant asserts that the part of the debt amount of C among the above loan certificates is cancelled by mistake as a declaration of intention.

However, there is no evidence to acknowledge the plaintiff's assertion, and in light of the above evidence, Gap evidence No. 2 and the whole purport of the arguments, the following circumstances, namely, Eul requested the defendant to post a telephone to borrow money as the defendant's seat, and ② the plaintiff shall be liable to the defendant.