1. Defendant B shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 85,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from June 28, 2015 to the date of full payment.

1. Determination as to the plaintiff's claim against the defendant B

(a) Indication of claim: The Plaintiff’s total amount of 85,00,000 won loan claims and damages for delay under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings therefor;

(b) Applicable provisions of Acts: Judgment by public notice (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act);

2. Determination as to the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant C

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff lent KRW 85,000,000 to Defendant B from April 2012 to January 8, 2015. Since Defendant B’s above loan is about the husband’s daily home affairs, Defendant C, who is the husband of Defendant B, is jointly and severally liable for the return of the above loan pursuant to Article 832 of the Civil Act.

B. (1) The legal act pertaining to daily home affairs as referred to in Article 832 of the Civil Act refers to a legal act pertaining to the ordinary affairs required in the community of both spouses. The specific scope is not only the social status of the married couple, property, and revenue capacity, but also the custom of the community, which is the place of the living of the couple. However, in determining whether the specific legal act is a legal act pertaining to daily home affairs, the specific scope is not limited to the internal circumstance of the married couple community or the individual purpose of the act, but also to the objective type, character, etc. of the legal act.

(See Supreme Court Decision 200Da8267 Decided April 25, 2000, etc.). Moreover, if an act of borrowing money is performed for the purpose of raising funds necessary for a couple’s community life, taking into account the amount, purpose of borrowing, actual expenditure purpose, and other circumstances, it may be deemed that such act belongs to a daily company.

(See Supreme Court Decision 98Da46877 delivered on March 9, 199). In the instant case, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in evidence Nos. 2, 6, 7, and 5, the Plaintiff’s statement from April 2012 to January 8, 2015.