1. The Defendant shall pay 70 million won to the Plaintiff and 20% per annum from January 20, 2015 to the day of complete payment.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 9, 2013, the Plaintiff lent KRW 70 million to the Defendant.

(hereinafter “instant loan”). (b)

On July 10, 2014, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a certificate of content that “The repayment of the instant loan shall be urged because the Defendant did not repay the loan by July 9, 2014, even if the repayment period was set at six months immediately after the date of the loan, and the repayment was set at the latest one year after the date of the loan.”

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1, 2, Gap 3-1

2. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff sought the payment of the instant loan to the Defendant, and the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff could not respond to the Plaintiff’s claim due because the period of repayment of the instant loan was July 9, 2016, which was three years after the date of the loan, was three years after the date of loan.

3. Issues and judgments

A. The key issue of the instant case is whether the maturity of the instant loan has arrived.

Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances, it is determined that the date of the closing of the argument in this case has come.

① In full view of the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3-1, 2, and 3-1, 3-2 of each of the statements and arguments as to the loans of this case, it can be acknowledged that the plaintiff sent the answer to the purport that "the "loan certificate" does not include the period of repayment, and that the defendant, as to the plaintiff's content certification, "it means that the plaintiff would meet the requirements for repayment one year to the plaintiff at the time of the loan," and that "the defendant would meet the requirements for two years from half to two years." Thus, it is difficult to find that the above evidence alone has a clear opinion among the original defendant as to the period of repayment

② In order to support the assertion that the Defendant agreed on the repayment period of the instant loan three years, the evidence Nos. 1 and 2 submitted by the Defendant is as follows: (i) the amount of the instant loan, grace period (three years), and the Defendant, which the Plaintiff received from the SC Japan Bank, in order to raise the instant loan in light of the matters stated therein and the Defendant’s reply.