1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 47,804,794 and the interest rate of KRW 25% per annum from April 14, 2015 to the day of complete payment.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant prepared and delivered two copies of the loan certificate as follows to the Plaintiff.

The loan certificate as of January 12, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as “the first loan certificate”) is “the second loan certificate” and “the second loan certificate as of January 13, 2015.”

The amount borrowed as at January 12, 2015: The loan interest of KRW 50 million from January 12, 2015 to April 12, 2015: 5 million won (C apartment 107 Dong 1502 as security): The loan interest of KRW 5 million from January 12, 2015 (C apartment 107 Dong 1502 as security): The loan interest of KRW 50 million from January 13, 2015 to April 13, 2015: the loan interest of KRW 5 million (D apartment 203 Dong 1903 as security): the loan interest of KRW 5 million from January 13, 2015 to April 13, 2015.

B. The Plaintiff deposited KRW 45 million on January 9, 2015, and KRW 43,503,00 on January 14, 2015, in a bank account under the E’s name, engaged in real estate brokerage business with the Defendant.

(hereinafter referred to as “first loan”) the said money deposited on January 9, 2015; and the said money deposited on January 14, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as “second loan”); / [Grounds for recognition] without dispute; entries in Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 3; and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff deposited the first and second loans in the bank account in the name of E designated by the Defendant, and lent the above money to the Defendant. Since the Defendant paid only KRW 50 million out of the loan 100 million, the Defendant is obligated to pay the remainder of KRW 50 million and damages for delay. 2) The Defendant’s assertion E borrowed the first loan from the Plaintiff and asked the Defendant to provide the security for the said loan.

The defendant had to use the second loan on the condition that it provides the plaintiff with the security for the first loan. Since the defendant paid the second loan to the plaintiff thereafter, there is no obligation to pay the plaintiff more.

B. The interpretation of the relevant legal principles and the expression of intent to apply in this case clearly establishes the objective meaning that the parties have given to the display act, and thus, what terms and conditions of the contract are between the parties.