1. The Defendant’s KRW 60,000,000 as well as 20% per annum from July 17, 2015 to September 30, 2015 to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On January 4, 2002, the Plaintiff lent KRW 40,000 to the Defendant.

B. On July 20, 2005, the Defendant prepared and delivered to the Plaintiff a certificate of 60,000,000 won loan, and on the back of the above certificate of loan, the Defendant stated “40,000,000 won of investment in the establishment of a company, 10,000,000 won of borrowed money, 7,000,0000 won of goods, and 3,00,00,000 won of tax evasion fine.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, it is reasonable to view that the defendant, on July 20, 2005, determined KRW 60,000 as the principal of the loan on the ground of the credit and obligation settlement, etc. during the period, and prepared and delivered the above certificate with the intent to repay it.

Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 60,000,000 and damages for delay.

Therefore, the defendant's argument that the above 60,000,000 won for goods and 3,000,000 won for tax evasion is not the original debtor, and the defendant's obligation to repay is not accepted).

1) The defendant asserts that the period of extinctive prescription has expired prior to the filing of the lawsuit in this case, since the above 60,000,000 won of the above 60,000 won of the above 60,000 won of the loan was received as investment funds of the company to be established by the defendant, and the 7,000,000 won of the goods price and the 3,000,000,000 won of the tax fine were generated from sale between merchants, all of them constitute claims arising from commercial activity. Therefore, the plaintiff asserts that the period of extinctive prescription has expired since it was not a commercial claim but the defendant renounced the extinctive prescription interest even if the period of extinctive prescription expires, the act of borrowing the 40,00,000 won of the investment funds for the company to be established by the defendant was considered as the nature of the act itself.