1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 120,373,854 to the Plaintiff, as well as KRW 9% per annum from September 7, 2013 to December 17, 2015.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. A. Around April 5, 2013, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 150,00,000 to the Defendant at the maturity of 150,000,000 on June 30, 2013 and at the annual interest rate of 9%, and agreed to claim for the calculation of interest in welfare when the repayment is not made within the agreed period. 2) The Plaintiff from the Defendant on June 7, 2013; and 6,00,00,000 won on June 7, 2013; and 18. 10,00,000 won on the same month; and 5,00,000,000 won on July 31, 2013; and

8.27. 5,00,000 won, and the same year.

6.6. 5,00,000 Won in total. 35,000,000

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the remaining principal of the loan that remains after the repayment of KRW 35,000,000,000, and damages for delay.

2. The defendant's defense defenses that an additional amount of KRW 44,500,000 has been paid to the plaintiff in addition to the repayment of KRW 35,00,000 as above, and that an additional amount of KRW 20,000 has been offset against the above loan claims. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge this, the defendant's repayment and defense has no merit.

3. Appropriation of appropriation;

A. The sum of KRW 35,00,000 paid by the Defendant to the Plaintiff was insufficient to extinguish all the interest on the principal and principal of the loan. Thus, barring special circumstances, barring any special circumstance, it shall be appropriated in the order of the interest, which is the order of statutory appropriation of performance, and the original, which is the order of appropriation of performance under Article 479(1) of the Civil Act. The result of the appropriation of performance

In addition, since the plaintiff agreed to claim the interest as the welfare interest, the interest from June 30, 2013 until the due date shall be included in the principal of the loan.

B. Therefore, as the Defendant claims against the Plaintiff, KRW 120,373,854 of the remainder of the loan that remains after appropriation to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s claim against this, the Defendant raised a dispute as to the existence or scope of the obligation from September 7, 2013.