The Defendant shall pay KRW 48,387,943 to the Plaintiff. The remainder of the Plaintiff’s claim is dismissed.

1/10 out of the costs of lawsuit.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff loaned KRW 35,000,000 to the Defendant on September 3, 2018, and KRW 10,000,000 on December 3, 2018, and KRW 10,000,000 on April 20, 2019, and KRW 35,000,000 on May 10, 2019.

B. On April 16, 2020, the Defendant promised the Plaintiff to pay KRW 35,000,000,000 including the principal and interest, until April 21, 2020, and drafted as evidence this loan certificate to the Plaintiff.

The loan certificate stating “(35,00,000)” (hereinafter “35,00,000 won loan certificate”) was prepared and supplemented.

(c)

In addition, on April 16, 2020, the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 15,000,000 as interest on the above loans of KRW 35,000,000, and "the defendant shall have promised to borrow KRW 15,000 to the plaintiff and make repayment until May 30, 2020, and shall assume all civil and criminal responsibilities in the event that the repayment is not made within the above deadline.

“The loan certificate of KRW 15,00,000 (hereinafter “the loan certificate of KRW 15,000”) was written and accompanied by the loan certificate of KRW 35,00,000 and the loan certificate of KRW 15,00,000 (hereinafter “each loan certificate of this case”).

(d)

On April 21, 2020, the Defendant paid KRW 5,000,000 to the Plaintiff via the Plaintiff’s account under the Plaintiff’s name.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The plaintiff's assertion is obligated to pay KRW 50,00,000 to the plaintiff according to the loan certificate for KRW 35,000 and the loan certificate for KRW 15,000,00.

B. Determination 1 on the cause of a claim is null and void for a contract interest rate under the Interest Limitation Act, which exceeds the maximum interest rate under the said Act (Article 2 of the Interest Limitation Act). Since the Interest Limitation Act is a mandatory provision, the application of the pertinent Act cannot be excluded on the ground of the existence of a disposition (such as a loan certificate, process certificate, etc.) contrary to the Interest Limitation Act in calculating the remaining debts of an obligor, and whether the said Act violates the said Act or not.