1. The defendant shall pay 89,00,000 won to the plaintiff and 12% per annum from March 13, 2019 to the day of full payment.

1. On April 13, 2017, the Plaintiff asserted that, in order to treat complex loans and repayment between the Defendant and the up to the point of time, the Plaintiff promised to pay interest calculated at the rate of 24% per annum on the loans, and then to receive interest calculated at the rate of 24% per annum on the loans. After that, the Defendant, etc. received KRW 16,350,000 from the Defendant, etc. was fully appropriated for the interest during the period prior to the date of delivery of a copy of the complaint, the Plaintiff shall receive damages for delay at the rate of 12% per annum from the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint to the day of full payment.

On April 13, 2017, the Defendant recognized that the Plaintiff and the loan were settled at KRW 89 million. However, the Plaintiff agreed on the interest rate of KRW 2.4% per annum between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff, i.e., KRW 16.35 million, and the amount to be paid to the Plaintiff is much smaller than the amount claimed by the Plaintiff if the agreement on the settlement of accounts was appropriated for the principal and principal.

2. Determination

A. According to the records in Gap’s agreed interest rate Gap’s evidence Nos. 1, 5, and Eul’s evidence Nos. 1, 1, and 1, the plaintiff and the defendant entered interest as 2.4 copies per annum on April 13, 2017 when preparing the certificate of borrowed money, and the defendant transferred 1,5650,000 won to the plaintiff’s passbook from the defendant and C (the defendant’s wife) over 47 times from April 27, 2017 to February 21, 2019, such as the statement in the attached remittance statement (the plaintiff is the person who received 1,635,00 won). However, considering the following facts and circumstances, considering the whole purport of the arguments in Gap’s evidence No. 2 through 5, and Eul evidence No. 1, it appears that the interest stated in Gap evidence No. 1 appears that 2.4% per annum is a clerical error in the amount of 2.4% per annum.

Therefore, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant agreed to pay the Plaintiff interest at the rate of 24% per annum.

(1) The interest rate lower than 5% per annum, which is the statutory interest rate, shall be set at the time of settling future interest to be paid among individuals in the course of settling loans.