1. As to the Plaintiff KRW 20,689,00 and KRW 8,689,00 among the above amounts, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 20,689,00 from October 14, 2013, and KRW 12,00.

1. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant should be paid KRW 67,789,000 in balance on the ground that he/she lent a total of KRW 170,300,000 to the defendant six times as set out below and received each such loan certificate from the defendant, and thereafter he/she was paid KRW 101,61,000 from the defendant.

In regard to this, the defendant asserts that there was no way to prepare and deliver a loan certificate with the same contents as the No. 5 to the plaintiff, and that there was no other loan certificate, and that there was no additional amount to be repaid since it actually borrowed KRW 101,61,00 after borrowing KRW 94,220,000.

The amount of repayment from the date of lease shall be the aggregate of KRW 18,00,000 on July 16, 2012, 2012, KRW 18,000,000 on July 23, 2012, and KRW 14,300,000 on July 30, 2012, 320 on September 14, 2012, 30, KRW 40,000 on December 30, 2012, KRW 40,00,000 on September 12, 2012, 200, and KRW 5,50 on December 13, 2012; and

2. Determination

A. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings as to the claims for loans Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 as to No. 1-1, 2, 3, 4-6, the Plaintiff may recognize the fact that the Plaintiff lent the Defendant a sum of KRW 122,30,000 (= KRW 18,300,000 KRW 14,300,000 KRW 28,000,000 KRW 12,00,000,000 KRW 50,000,000,000 won) (as seen earlier, the Defendant asserts that the actual amount of loans is less than the amount stated in the loan certificate, but the court recognizes the existence of a loan transaction as being accompanied by the Plaintiff’s expression of intent and a statement of intent in addition to the above statement of intent and a statement of intent that recognized the authenticity of the establishment of the original loan transaction as stated in the loan certificate, and it is evident and acceptable.