1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 52,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from June 4, 2016 to the date of complete payment.

1. On January 1, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant drafted a loan certificate stating the loan amount of KRW 52,000,000 (hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”) with the Plaintiff’s name, resident registration number, mobile phone number and address in the creditor column, and the Defendant entered his name, resident registration number, mobile phone number and address in the debtor column.

The loan column of the loan certificate of this case and the debtor's name side of the defendant's name are affixed with the defendant's seal impression affixed.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. A. A summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff loaned a sum of KRW 52,00,000 to the Defendant, and the Defendant agreed to pay it by preparing the loan certificate of this case. 2) The Defendant did not affix the seal on the loan certificate of this case, and this is the Plaintiff’s arbitrary seal. 2) The Defendant did not borrow the amount of KRW 52,00,000 from the Plaintiff.

C) The loan certificate of this case was drafted on the condition that the Plaintiff transferred the Ecuas car that the Plaintiff was going to the Defendant, and that the documents related to the loan and the proceeds from the loan kept by the Plaintiff would be KRW 30,000,000. However, the Plaintiff did not comply with the loan certificate. (b) Whether the authenticity of the loan certificate of this case was duly established or not is recorded in the debtor column of the loan certificate of this case, and the Defendant stated his name, resident registration number, mobile phone number and address in the debtor column of the loan certificate of this case, and the Defendant’s seal impression is affixed to the Defendant’s name and the debtor column.

Therefore, the authenticity of the entire loan certificate of this case is recognized.

The defendant asserts that the plaintiff had affixed the defendant's seal imprint on the loan certificate of this case at his own discretion, but there is no evidence to acknowledge this.

In addition, the defendant's debtor column for the loan certificate of this case.