1. Defendant B’s interest in KRW 40,668,480 and KRW 40,00,000 among the Plaintiff, from April 24, 2018 to the date of full payment.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 13, 2015, the Plaintiff extended a loan of KRW 40 million to Defendant B with a maturity of May 13, 2018 and the overdue interest rate of KRW 11.26% (hereinafter “instant loan”).

Defendant B delayed to repay the loan on January 17, 2018, and on April 23, 2018, Defendant B reaches KRW 40,668,480, including the principal and interest of the loan, KRW 40 million and interest KRW 668,480, as of April 23, 2018.

B. On March 8, 2018, Defendant B filed an application for individual rehabilitation with the Daejeon District Court 2018 Daejeon District Court (2018da1003941) and was in insolvent.

Meanwhile, the individual rehabilitation application case was decided to commence the individual rehabilitation procedure on September 28, 2018, but on November 12, 2018, the decision was made to discontinue the individual rehabilitation procedure without authorization of the repayment plan or immunity due to the absence of the defendant B on the date of the meeting of creditors.

C. On March 27, 2018, Defendant B entered into a mortgage agreement with Defendant C regarding the real estate listed in the separate list owned by Defendant B (hereinafter “instant real estate”) with the maximum debt amount of KRW 50 million, and completed the registration of the establishment of the mortgage agreement (hereinafter “mortgage”) based on the Acheon Branch of Daejeon District Court No. 20672, Mar. 27, 2018, as the receipt of the Acheon Branch of the Daejeon District Court’s Masan Branch Office.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above findings of determination as to the claim against Defendant B, Defendant B is obligated to pay the principal and interest of this case to the Plaintiff.

As to this, Defendant B asserts that: (a) scheduled repayment of the instant loan within the prompt time limit; or (b) applied for individual rehabilitation under Daejeon District Court Decision 2018Da1003941, March 8, 2018.

However, there is no evidence to prove that Defendant B repaid the loan to the Plaintiff as of the closing date of pleadings (the defendant does not have any details of repayment), and as seen earlier, the individual rehabilitation case against Defendant B against the Defendant is an individual rehabilitation case on September 28, 2018.