1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 31, 2009, the Defendant: (a) lent KRW 10,00,000 to the Plaintiff on the 3% of interest per month; and (b) on the 4th day of each month on the date of payment of interest (hereinafter “advance loan”); and (c) completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage on the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City’s Underground Floor D (hereinafter “C Real Estate”) from the Plaintiff to secure this.

B. On October 8, 2009, the Defendant: (a) lent KRW 30,00,000 to the Plaintiff on a monthly basis as interest rate of KRW 2%; (b) the date of payment of interest (hereinafter “instant loan”; and (c) paid KRW 28,650,000 except prior interest, etc. under a contract concluded for the creation of the instant loan; (d) on October 8, 2009, the Defendant completed the registration of the establishment of a mortgage on the real estate C real estate and the attached Table 1 list (hereinafter “instant real estate”) as stated in the purport of the claim for KRW 45,00,000,00 for securing the instant loan claims.

(hereinafter referred to as “the instant collateral security”). C.

The Plaintiff borrowed 9,400,000 won from the Defendant to the Defendant on July 31, 2009 after deducting advance interest, etc. from the Defendant on July 10, 2009. However, the Plaintiff violated the highest interest rate of 30% per annum or 25% per annum under the Interest Limitation Act. Thus, from the interest paid in 300,000 won to the Defendant during 81 months from August 1, 2009 to April 19, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for a payment order to the effect that “the Plaintiff returned 6,094,080 won to the Defendant for unjust enrichment” was deducted from the interest applied by the interest rate of 30,000 won under the Interest Limitation Act, and the Defendant raised an objection against the payment order to the district court, and the Defendant paid 2016,000 won to the Plaintiff on July 31, 2017 to the Plaintiff.”

(hereinafter referred to as “prior Action”). [Ground for recognition] A does not dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, Eul 6, 9, 12.