1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the amount ordered to be paid under the following 2.1 shall be revoked.

1. On April 20, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with C to grant five copies of the household check (the check number D, E: the date of issuance on June 20, 2013; the check number F, G, and H: the date of issuance on July 20, 2013) on the first day of the face value of KRW 3 million issued by the Defendant, and the agent for the Defendant entered into a contract with C on July 20, 2013 (hereinafter “instant contract”). The agent for the Defendant: (a) interest rate of KRW 15 million shall be 30% per annum; and (b) the maturity of KRW 6 million shall be KRW 9 million on June 20, 2013; and (c) the maturity of KRW 9 million on July 20, 2013 (hereinafter “instant contract”).

According to the above contract, the Plaintiff deducted KRW 975,00 as the agreed interest rate of KRW 14,025,00 from the rental date to the maturity date, and remitted KRW 14,000 to the passbook under the name of

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1, 2 through 3 (including a case where there has been an additional number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion ① A, the defendant's representative, borrowed KRW 15 million from the plaintiff, and the defendant is liable to pay the above loan and delay damages to the plaintiff. ② Even if C did not have the right of representation regarding the conclusion of the contract of this case, the defendant granted C the right of representation concerning cash management, such as the issuance of household checks, and there are reasonable grounds to believe C had the right of representation to conclude the contract of this case on behalf of the defendant. Thus, the defendant is liable to pay the plaintiff the loan in accordance with the legal principles of expression agency under Article 125 of the Civil Act and Article 126 of the Civil Act

B. The Defendant’s assertion ① The instant contract is not a loan for consumption secured by the check, but merely a loan for sale and purchase, and thus the party who is to pay the check is not the Defendant, the issuer of the check, but the actual discount of the check. ② The Defendant had C keep the Defendant’s passbook and household check, etc., and C borrowed money from the Plaintiff without the Defendant’s authority. ③ The instant contract is a loan for consumption even if it is a loan for consumption.