1. As to KRW 65,460,741 and KRW 58,136,426 among them, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the year from March 10, 2015 to March 24, 2017.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff supplied advertising promotional items equivalent to KRW 30,000 to the Defendant, upon receipt of a request from the Defendant to grant a loan due to a shortage of funds, respectively lent KRW 30,00,000 to the Defendant on April 12, 201, and KRW 20,000,000 on June 13, 201, and KRW 10,000 on June 20, 201.

B. In addition, the Plaintiff purchased crude oil to process edible milk to be supplied to the department store from the Defendant, upon receipt of a request from the Defendant to grant a loan due to insufficient funds, and lent KRW 10,000,00 to the Defendant on July 25, 201.

C. After that, the Plaintiff filed a complaint against the Defendant in fraud. The Defendant did not have any intent or ability to complete payment even if he borrowed money from the Plaintiff, and there was no business that supplied advertising promotions to the insurance company or supplied food milk to the department stores around 201. Nevertheless, the Defendant was convicted of having been convicted of the Defendant on the criminal facts constituting “a total of KRW 70,000,000 by deceiving the Plaintiff,” and the said judgment became final and conclusive on December 29, 2016.

[The Seoul Western District Court Decision 2016Ra283, 2016Ma725 (Consolidated) decided June 10, 2016; Supreme Court Decision 2016No820 Decided October 20, 2016; Supreme Court Decision 2016Do820 Decided October 20, 2016; Supreme Court Decision 2016Do1793 Decided December 29, 2016] / [Grounds for recognition] The absence of any dispute; Party A’s entries in the evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 6 (including the serial number); the purport of the entire pleadings;

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant, even if borrowing money from the plaintiff, did not have the intent or ability to complete payment, by deceiving the plaintiff as if he had such intent or ability, and by deceiving the plaintiff as if he had such intent or ability, barring any special circumstances, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff a total of KRW 70,000,000 as tort liability liability and damages for delay thereof, and the defendant calculates the amount of the plaintiff who received repayment from the defendant according to the statement of satisfaction of performance according to the statement of satisfaction of performance stated in the attached Table, the last date of repayment.