1. Plaintiff A’s 2,00,000,000 won based on the loan certificate drawn up on April 2017 against the Defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff Company is a company that was established on March 23, 2016 and is constructing A (hereinafter “A”) in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E, and Plaintiff C is the representative of the Plaintiff Company.

B. On March 9, 2017, the Defendant received a loan certificate issued by the Plaintiff Company, Plaintiff C, a joint and several surety, with the content that the Defendant promised to repay by April 21, 2017 (hereinafter “the loan certificate in this case”) upon confirming that it borrowed KRW 2 billion from the Plaintiffs on March 9, 2017.

C. On April 20, 2017, Plaintiff C prepared a share transfer contract, which transfers the Plaintiff Company’s registered common shares of KRW 200,00 ( KRW 500,000 per share) to the Defendant, and the notary public notarized by F.1279, which was the purpose of securing the amount borrowed by the Plaintiff Company.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 6, 7, Eul evidence Nos. 6 and 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs' assertion and judgment

A. The loan certificate prepared by the plaintiffs' assertion is prepared at the defendant's request. This is calculated on the basis of 120% of the interest rate violating the Interest Limitation Act (10% per month).

Plaintiff

From October 27, 2016 to September 29, 2017, the Company borrowed money from the Defendant and repaid the money, and even if applying the interest rate of 25% per annum, which is the highest interest rate under the Interest Limitation Act on the borrowed money, 43,785,680 won was paid in excess.

Therefore, the loan obligation of this case does not exist, and the defendant shall refund interest 43,785,680 won paid in excess to the plaintiff company and interest interest thereon, and the shares of the plaintiff company transferred for the purpose of security shall also be returned to the plaintiff C.

B. According to the facts as seen earlier, it is recognized that the Plaintiffs prepared and delivered the instant loan certificate to the Defendant that the Plaintiffs had the obligation to borrow KRW 2 billion.

However, Gap 3 to 8, 13, .