1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, regarding the Plaintiff’s KRW 70,230,091 and KRW 50,000 among the judgment, as to the Defendant’s KRW 70,230,091, October 15, 2013.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff deducted the interest rate of 2% per month, and set the interest rate of 0.1315% per day on December 29, 201, with the maturity of KRW 20 million as of January 28, 2012, and KRW 30 million on March 2, 2012 as of March 30, 201, respectively.

B. The Plaintiff from the end of January 2012 to the same year

8. up to August 8, 2000 won was paid by the Defendant.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to pay the principal and interest of the loan to the Plaintiff, barring special circumstances. However, according to Article 2(1), (3), and (4) of the former Interest Limitation Act (amended by Act No. 10925, Jul. 25, 201; hereinafter the same), and Article 2(1) of the former Interest Limitation Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 25376, Jun. 11, 2014), the maximum interest rate under a contract for lending and borrowing of money is 30% per annum, and the portion exceeding the maximum interest rate is null and void, and where the obligor arbitrarily pays the interest exceeding the maximum interest rate, the amount equivalent to the interest paid is appropriated for the principal, and even if a loan contract for consumption or a renewal contract is concluded on the amount equivalent to the interest paid in excess, it shall not become effective as to the portion of the above amount.

(See Supreme Court Decision 98Da17046 Decided October 13, 1998, and Supreme Court Decision 2012Da81203 Decided February 14, 2013, etc.). Therefore, as long as the rate of delay damage per annum 0.1315% per annum exceeds 30% per annum as prescribed by the former Interest Limitation Act, it shall be null and void in that part, the Defendant shall be deemed null and void in that part. Therefore, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay of KRW 70,230,091 [20 million ( KRW 30 million) from January 29, 2012 to October 11, 2013, total damages for delay of KRW 20,230,091 [20,000 per annum from January 29, 2012 to October 29, 2013]

3. Damages for delay of KRW 1,016,393 ( KRW 20 million x 62/366 x 30% per annum) from March 31, 2012.