1. The Defendant is the issuer, the amount of KRW 150 million, C Co., Ltd., the place of payment, the date of issue, and the blank.

The plaintiff asserted by the parties, from July 28, 2001 to October 27, 2005, the plaintiff borrowed approximately KRW 50 million in total from the defendant, and repaid the principal and interest of KRW 350 million in full, and he had a debt of KRW 150 million in around November 2005, and issued and issued the number of copies stated in paragraph (1) of this Article to the defendant to secure the above money.

From November 7, 2005 to February 18, 2006, the Plaintiff borrowed a total of KRW 80 million from the Defendant, and repaid KRW 70 million, thereby holding only KRW 160 million around January 22, 2007.

The Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to pay KRW 10 million as interest per month for the obligation of KRW 160 million, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 3 million to the Defendant from January 22, 2007 to March 20, 2017 as interest payment every month.

However, according to the Interest Limitation Act enforced on June 30, 2007, the amount equivalent to the interest exceeding 30% per annum is appropriated for the principal. Thus, on April 15, 2009, the Plaintiff paid KRW 160 million to the Defendant in full by paying the principal amount of KRW 5 million. From April 15, 2009 to March 20, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 372,942,218 to the Defendant without any legal cause.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 372,942,218 won and damages for delay received from the plaintiff without any legal ground.

In addition, since the plaintiff paid all of the money borrowed to the defendant, the defendant is obligated to return to the plaintiff the deposit sheet under Paragraph (1) of the Disposition, which is delivered to secure the loan to the plaintiff.

However, insofar as the Defendant is disputing the existence and scope of the claim for borrowed money against the Plaintiff, the Defendant is seeking confirmation that there is no obligation under the check of this case.

The defendant's assertion is not a loan of KRW 160 million to the plaintiff, but a loan of KRW 160 million, and the amount that the plaintiff paid to the defendant is a dividend.

On January 2007, the Plaintiff is considered to have received the investment money.