1. The Defendant’s KRW 25,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from May 13, 2015 to January 13, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 10, 2007, the Plaintiff lent 30,000,000 won to the Defendant on September 30, 2008 without specifying interest.

B. On November 14, 201, Nonparty C subrogated for KRW 5,000,000 out of the Defendant’s above loan obligations.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of claim, the defendant did not have any separate interest agreement on the obligation of the loan of this case (=30,000,000 won - 5,000,000 won) to the plaintiff, and therefore, there is only damages for delay at the statutory interest rate after the due date. However, since the defendant asserts that the amount repaid in the written reply is appropriated for the principal, and the plaintiff does not dispute this, it is deemed that there was an implied agreement on appropriation between the parties.

In addition, since the legal interest rate prescribed by the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings is changed from May 13, 2015 to 15% from the date following the delivery date of the original copy of the instant payment order that the Plaintiff seeks after the due date, and it is deemed reasonable for the Defendant to resist the existence and scope of the instant payment order from May 13, 2015 to January 13, 2016, which is the date of this decision, to the date of this decision, and the legal interest rate of 15% per annum prescribed by the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the date of full payment, the portion in excess shall not be accepted.

Any person shall be liable to pay damages for delay in proportion to each ratio.

B. On January 20, 2010, the Defendant asserted that the Defendant paid KRW 10,000,000 to the Defendant out of the instant loan obligations. Thus, the Defendant paid KRW 10,000,00 to the Plaintiff on January 20, 2010 did not dispute between the parties. However, according to the evidence No. 3, the Plaintiff’s statement is separate from the instant loan on February 18, 2008.