1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 48,500,000 for the Plaintiff and KRW 20% per annum from August 8, 2015 to September 30, 2015; and (b) October 1, 2015 for the Plaintiff.

The Defendant issued Chapter 8 of Promissory Notes (hereinafter “each of the Promissory Notes”) as indicated in the details of the issuance of the Promissory Notes with the payee’s “C” and “Seoul” (hereinafter “C”), and each of the Promissory Notes was endorsed and transferred by the payee C, and the Plaintiff presented payment on the date of payment of each of the Promissory Notes. However, there is no dispute between the parties as to the refusal of payment. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff 15% annual interest rate from August 8, 2015 to September 30, 2015, following the delivery date of a copy of the Promissory Notes, to the day of complete payment, to the day of complete payment (the Plaintiff is obliged to pay 20% interest rate from October 1, 2015 to the day of full payment of the Promissory Notes), and to pay 15% interest rate per annum as calculated under the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion of Legal Proceedings, etc. from the day following the delivery of a copy of the Promissory Notes to the day of payment).

As to this, the Defendant, prior to the issuance of each of the instant bills, issued copies 14 of Promissory Notes total face value of KRW 72,000,000 (hereinafter “each of the instant bills”) and asserts that the Plaintiff’s request cannot be complied with as it issued each of the instant bills subject to collection of KRW 48,50,000, total face value of the said bills (hereinafter “each of the instant bills”).

However, the facts that each prior bill of this case was issued do not conflict between the parties, but there is no evidence to prove that each prior bill of this case was issued under the condition as alleged by the defendant. Thus, the defendant's above assertion is without merit

In addition, the defendant alleged that he paid KRW 12,00,000 out of each of the respective bills of this case, but there is no evidence to prove this, and the defendant's assertion on this part is without merit.

Therefore, the plaintiff.