1. Defendant B’s KRW 234,677,300 and its annual rate shall be 5% from January 1, 201 to July 24, 2014, respectively, to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 5, 2009, the Plaintiff lent to Defendant B, who was engaged in real estate brokerage business in China, a 900,000 Chinese People’s Republic of China (hereinafter “competence”) and around February 5, 2010, the said loan repayment period was determined and issued by Defendant B as December 31, 2010.

B. Around April 2010, the Plaintiff lent an additional 900,000 square meters to Defendant B without setting the due date.

C. Defendant C, the wife of Defendant B, repaid to the Plaintiff KRW 100,000 on July 6, 2010, and KRW 50,000 on July 8, 2010 (the exchange rate base 270,000 on July 2, 201) respectively.

At the time of the closing of the argument in this case, the basic exchange rate of Madernization is KRW 173.19 won per the first bill.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, facts of public notice, or significant facts in this court, Gap 1, 2, and 3 evidence, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The judgment of this Court

A. According to the facts acknowledged in paragraph (1) of the determination as to the claim against Defendant B, Defendant B is obligated to pay damages for delay at the rate of 247,661,70 won, which was calculated by converting the balance of the above loan obligation (i.e., 90,000 square meters - 100,000 square meters - 270,000 square meters - 270,000 square meters) at the exchange rate as of the date of the closing of argument of this case (i.e., 1430,000 won x 173.19 won), among the 234,67,300 won claimed by the Plaintiff, and after the agreed repayment, 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act from January 1, 2011 until July 24, 2014, the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, and 20% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Facilitation, etc.

B. According to the evidence No. 1 Gap 2 as to the claim against the defendant C, the defendant C borrowed the above bill from February 5, 2010 to the plaintiff, "B", and then confirmed as follows at the time of the next repayment.

After indicating "after signing, it has become one's own signature in the column for confirmation that 1,430,000 square meters of the 1.8 million bill were repaid and the 1,430,000 bill remains.