1. The Defendant paid KRW 20,010,00 to the Plaintiff KRW 5% per annum from June 28, 2016 to February 2, 2017.

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Plaintiff loaned KRW 10,00,000 to the Defendant’s bank account as of December 25, 2014, ① on November 24, 2014, ② on November 8, 2014, KRW 10,000,00 as of December 25, 2014, to the Defendant or C, by means of remitting KRW 0,000 to the Defendant’s bank account; ② on January 18, 2015, KRW 00,000, KRW 00,000, KRW 20,000, KRW 30,000, KRW 30,000, KRW 10,000, KRW 30,000, KRW 30,000, KRW 30,000, KRW 50, KRW 30,000, KRW 30,05, KRW 30,015, KRW 30,530,015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 to 5 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff a total amount of KRW 20,010,000,000 and delay damages therefor. 2) The Plaintiff separately delivered cash to the Defendant by means of issuing the Plaintiff in cash, and determined the due date as March 31, 2015; and 2.3.2.3.2.2. on March 2, 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that the due date was set and lent KRW 1,000,000 to the Defendant on April 30, 2015. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge this, the Plaintiff’s above assertion is rejected.

C. In conclusion, the Defendant is a bond with no fixed period of repayment for the Plaintiff’s total amount of KRW 20,010,000 and the Plaintiff’s credit against the Defendant. In such a case, the obligee is liable for delay only after the obligor notified the obligor of the return within a reasonable period of time in accordance with Article 603(2) of the Civil Act. According to the evidence No. 4, prior to the filing of the instant lawsuit, the Defendant can acknowledge the fact that the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the return of the loan prior to the filing of the instant lawsuit.

Since then, the defendant's obligation to implement since June 28, 2016, on the day following the delivery date of the complaint of this case sought by the plaintiff.