1. Defendant B shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 28,00,600, and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from October 18, 2016 to the date of full payment.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in the evidence No. 1 as to the claim against Defendant B, Defendant B agreed to pay the Plaintiff KRW 27 million monthly rent and management fee for 9 months, and KRW 6,527,520,000 to the Plaintiff on October 28, 2015, with the monthly rent of KRW 4,330,000 from the Plaintiff on May 2014.

Therefore, Defendant B is obligated to pay 28,00,600 won, such as overdue rent, etc., and 15% interest per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from October 18, 2016 to the day of full payment as the day following the due date for repayment of a copy of the complaint of this case, according to the Plaintiff’s request from the Plaintiff.

2. The Plaintiff asserts that, inasmuch as Defendant C agreed to pay the overdue rent, etc. to the Plaintiff at the time of the payment agreement around September 2015, as the Plaintiff agreed with Defendant C to pay the overdue rent, etc., the Plaintiff is obligated to pay the overdue rent of KRW 28,00,60 as stated in the purport of the claim and the delay damages therefrom.

Comprehensively taking account of the descriptions of evidence No. 1 and the overall purport of the pleadings, the Plaintiff received cash custody certificates (Evidence No. 1) from Defendant B, stating that “The Plaintiff would reimburse the Plaintiff for the overdue rent and management expenses up to October 28, 2015, and grant the Plaintiff the right to collateral security with respect to the forest located in the south Sea and South Korea, which is owned by the Defendant C,” around September 2015; ② at the time, Defendant B entered the signature of Defendant C directly at the end of the cash custody certificate at the end of the cash custody certificate; and thereafter, it can be recognized that the said cash custody certificate was attached to the Plaintiff in the form that the Defendant C did not sit together.

However, as long as there is no evidence to deem that Defendant B was legally authorized by Defendant C with respect to the return of overdue rent, etc. and the establishment of the right to collateral security, the evidence No. 1 is sufficient.