1. The Defendants shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 50 million and the interest thereon from January 12, 2016 to the day of complete payment.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 12, 2015, the Plaintiff: (a) deposited interest of KRW 50 million with Defendant B at KRW 2 million per annum (48% per annum; and (b) the due date of repayment was determined on February 11, 2016 (hereinafter “instant loan”).

At the time, Defendant B offered 53 copies of the loan funds as security to the Plaintiff, and Defendant C jointly and severally guaranteed Defendant B’s debt.

B. The Defendants did not have attempted to perform or try to perform the obligation to borrow funds or the obligation to provide joint and several sureties for the loan of this case until the date of closing the argument.

[Ground of Recognition] between the Plaintiff and the Defendant C: The fact that there is no dispute (which is deemed as a confession of Defendant C) between the Plaintiff and the Defendant B: Each entry in the evidence No. 1-7, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts, according to the judgment as to the cause of the claim, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the interest or delay damages calculated at the rate of 25% per annum, which is the highest interest rate from January 12, 2016 to the date of full payment under the Interest Limitation Act, which is the starting point for which the Plaintiff seeks to seek.

(4) The Plaintiff’s interest rate under the Act on Registration of Credit Business, etc. and Protection of Finance Users at the time of the instant loan is deemed to be the highest interest rate under the Act on Registration of Credit Business, etc. and Protection of Finance Users. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff is a credit service provider, and an interest agreement exceeding the highest interest rate under the Interest Limitation Act recognized earlier is null and void. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim for damages for delay exceeding

3. As to the Defendant B’s assertion, Defendant B actually received and used KRW 50 million received from the instant loan, the actual transaction party is either the Plaintiff (user) and the Defendant C (user) or the Plaintiff and Defendant C (Defendant C) conspired with each other without any substantial funding.