1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 15,917,53 and the interest rate of KRW 20% per annum from October 1, 2013 to the day of full payment.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. A. Around December 2008, the Plaintiff determined interest on the Defendant as 3% per month, and lent 30 million won over three occasions.

B. From January 2009 to March 2012, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 900,000 per month interest to the Plaintiff.

C. The Defendant paid KRW 4.3 million to the Plaintiff on June 30, 2012, and KRW 65,000 on August 8, 2012, and the Plaintiff and the Defendant appropriated this to repay the principal of the loan.

[Ground for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence No. 3, and the purport of whole pleading

2. Determination

A. The maximum interest rate under a contract for lending and borrowing of money cannot exceed 30% per annum (Article 2(1) of the Interest Limitation Act). If an obligor has voluntarily paid the interest exceeding the maximum interest rate, the amount equivalent to the interest paid in excess shall be appropriated for the principal (Article 2(4) of the same Act). According to the above facts, the Defendant paid 3% per month (i.e., 36% per annum) to the Plaintiff from January 2009 to March 2012 pursuant to the interest agreement, but the Defendant paid 90,000 won per month interest to the Plaintiff. However, the remainder of the loan is appropriated for the interest calculated at the rate of 2.5% per annum (30% per annum) and the remainder is appropriated for the principal. Accordingly, the balance of the loan principal around March 2012 should be appropriated for the amount calculated at the rate of 20,282,530 won (less than KRW 20,5330,515,570,5000).

B. The Defendant asserts that all the money paid each month to the Plaintiff from January 2009 to March 2012 was appropriated for the repayment of the principal of the said loan.

However, as to the order of appropriation of interest and principal, unless there is an agreement between the creditor and the debtor, it shall be appropriated for payment in the order of interest and principal (see Article 479(1) of the Civil Act), and Article 479(3) of the Civil Act (the defendant asserts that it was only an obstacle due to the plaintiff's coercion, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it, the above assertion is without merit).