1. The defendant's KRW 7,00,000 and its amount shall be 5% per annum from June 24, 2020 to October 7, 2020 to the plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 2019, the Defendant entered into an investment agreement for a tourist destination development project with the Plaintiff for a period of twenty (20) years, and received investment KRW 150,000 from the Plaintiff.

B. However, the Plaintiff demanded the return of the investment amount to the Defendant, and the Defendant returned 50 million won to the Plaintiff and subsequently returned the remaining KRW 100 million, and the Plaintiff prepared a loan certificate with the following contents as of November 22, 2019 and delivered it to the Plaintiff.

The first loan of 100 million won per day (Won 100,000 won per month): The second loan of 50,000,000 won by May 30, 2020: the second payment of 50,000 won by December 31, 2020 (Provided, That there is no contract with A, such as an investment agreement, etc.) (the interest deposit date: December 19, 2019; the deposit date shall be made on December 19, 201); the ground for recognition / The statement in subparagraphs 1, 2, 1, and 1, and each statement in subparagraph 1, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff is obligated to pay 10 million won in total and 10 million won as the defendant did not pay 50 million won until May 30, 2020 and lost the benefit of the time due to the defendant's failure to pay 50 million won. Accordingly, the defendant asserts that the amount for which the time limit comes is paid by May 30, 2020 and the amount for which the time limit comes shall be paid by 50 million won, and 43 million won among them shall be claimed.

B. According to the above facts of recognition, 50 million won out of the amount that the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff has arrived, but the remaining 50 million won has not yet arrived.

Although the Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant has lost the benefit of time, there is a special agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the loss of the benefit of time, which is presumed to be for the benefit of the obligor.

There is no evidence to deem that there has been a cause for loss of time under Article 388 of the Civil Act to the Defendant.

Thus, the defendant has already become due and payable to the plaintiff.