1. Defendant B’s KRW 13,00,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s KRW 2.36% per annum from August 28, 2014 to October 28, 2014; and

1. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B

A. The Plaintiff’s display of the claim is KRW 13,00,000 out of the loans, as of August 27, 2014, and the due date ( October 27, 2014), 20% per annum from October 28, 2014, and 20% per annum from the date of full payment, to the date of full payment after the due date ( October 27, 2014).

Articles 208(3)2 and 150(1)2 of the Civil Procedure Act of the judgment by deeming a confession

C. As to the damages for delay to be dismissed, the Plaintiff claimed damages for delay at the rate of 20% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from October 29, 2014 to the date of full payment after the due date ( October 27, 2014). However, the Plaintiff’s claim for damages for delay from October 29, 2014 to the date of full payment, which the Plaintiff reduced the Plaintiff’s claim from October 29, 2014 to the date of full payment, and it is reasonable to determine that only the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act until July 13, 2015, on which the application for change of the cause of the claim

A. The following facts are acknowledged if the facts of recognition are added to the statements in Gap evidence 1, 2, 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1-1, 2, and 2 of Eul, and the purport of the entire argument in the result of defendant B's personal examination:

1) Defendant C Farming Partnership (hereinafter “Defendant C Farming”)

D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) around August 2014

The construction of a new apartment unit on the land outside E and one parcel was contracted to the Haju City. Defendant B is the actual operator of D, and Defendant B is the F Co., Ltd. F (hereinafter “F”) on August 27, 2014 in the name of D.

2) The part of the construction project in question (hereinafter referred to as the “instant subcontracted project”) shall be the parts of the said subcontracted project.

(2) G, the Plaintiff’s father, is the actual operator of F, and G is the Defendant B, who is the owner of the instant subcontracted project, directly prepares a contract agreement with the F and the Defendant C Farming name, the owner of the instant subcontracted project, in order to guarantee the payment of the construction cost.