1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 42,562,658 and KRW 41,402,983 among them, from November 28, 2019 to the day of full payment.

Facts of recognition

On July 20, 201, the Plaintiff loaned 50,000,000 won to the Defendant on July 20, 201, with the repayment period of 60 months, the principal and interest on repayment method, the interest rate of 14.9% per annum, and the overdue interest rate of 17.9% per annum.

According to Article 8 subparagraph 2 of the Credit Transaction Basic Terms and Conditions stipulated in the instant loan agreement, if the debtor delays the payment of the principal and interest in installments on more than two consecutive occasions, the debtor shall lose the benefit of time.

The Defendant did not pay the principal and interest payable to the Plaintiff on October 20, 2019 and November 20, 2019 in accordance with the instant loan agreement, thereby delaying the payment of the principal and interest under the instant loan agreement at least twice.

As of November 27, 2019, the debt balance of the loan contract of this case as of November 27, 2019 is the total of KRW 41,402,983, interest of KRW 1,159,675, and KRW 42,562,658.

[Ground of recognition] In light of the facts without dispute between the parties, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 9 (including each number, hereinafter the same shall apply), and the facts of recognition as to the ground of claim as to the purport of the whole pleadings, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff delayed payment damages for agreed terms calculated at the rate of 17.9% per annum, which is the overdue interest rate of the loan contract of this case from November 28, 2019 to the date of full payment, as to the principal amount of the loan of this case and the principal amount of KRW 42,562,658, and the principal amount of KRW 41,402,983.

As to the defendant's defense, the defendant did not receive the vehicle of this case from the seller, and since the plaintiff conspireds with the seller to commit the above fraud, the loan contract of this case is concluded due to the plaintiff's fraud, and it is proved that the contract of this case is revoked.

In light of the evidence evidence Nos. 7 and 8, it is insufficient to acknowledge that the instant loan contract was concluded due to the Plaintiff’s fraudulent act only with the evidence submitted by the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

The defendant's defense is without merit.

In conclusion, this conclusion is followed.