1. The Defendant’s KRW 20,000,000 and the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from February 6, 2013 to February 5, 2015.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 24, 2007, the Plaintiff entered into a golf membership agreement with the Defendant and paid KRW 220 million to the Defendant on July 2, 2007.

B. On November 5, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an application for the withdrawal of golf membership with the Defendant.

C. On November 5, 2012, and July 14, 2014, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to return the amount of KRW 220 million.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1-1, 2, Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 3, Gap evidence Nos. 4-1 and 4-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. On November 5, 2012, the fact that the Plaintiff filed an application for withdrawal to the Defendant on November 5, 2012 and requested the return of the membership fee in writing is as seen earlier.

In full view of the purport of the statement and the entire argument by Gap evidence No. 2, it is acknowledged that the plaintiff and the defendant may withdraw from the membership after the lapse of five years from the conclusion of the membership agreement pursuant to Article 3(2) and (4) of the Golf Membership Agreement, and that the principal shall be returned within three months from the time of a written request for the return of the membership fee.

Therefore, from February 6, 2013, when three months have elapsed since November 5, 2012, the date when the defendant requested the return of membership fee of KRW 220 million to the Plaintiff, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 5% per annum under the Civil Act from February 5, 2015, which is the date when the judgment was rendered, to the effect that the Defendant’s defense as to the existence of the obligation or the scope of the obligation is reasonable, and 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the date when the obligation is fully paid.

(1) The Plaintiff’s claim for damages for delay from November 6, 2012, which is the day following the day on which the Plaintiff requested the return of the membership fee. However, as seen earlier, the Plaintiff agreed to return the principal within three months at the time of the request for the return of the membership fee, and the Defendant agreed to do so, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim for damages for delay exceeding the above scope is rejected).