1. As to KRW 30,00,000 and KRW 15,000 among them, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the year from July 1, 2015 to September 21, 2016.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 22, 2014, the Defendant agreed to borrow KRW 30 million from the Plaintiff as the owner of the construction project, and agreed to repay within eight months from the date of borrowing, and prepared and delivered the loan certificate to the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter “instant loan agreement”). (b)

The Plaintiff, according to the instant loan agreement, transferred KRW 30 million to the bank account of Nonparty C, who worked as the managing director at the time of the Defendant’s managing director, as the sum of KRW 20 million on April 22, 2014, KRW 20 million on April 23, 2014, and KRW 8 million on April 24, 201.

C. On May 27, 2015, the Defendant prepared a letter of performance that he/she would pay 15 million won out of the above loan 30 million won until June 30, 2015, and the remainder of 15 million won until July 30, 2015 and deliver it to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1-5, 7-10 (including virtual numbers), and the purport of the body before oral argument

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of claim, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 30 million and KRW 15 million from July 1, 2015 to September 21, 2016, which is the day following the due date for payment of the contract, 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act, from September 21, 2016, the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, 15% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings, the remainder of KRW 15,00,00 from July 31, 2015 to September 21, 2016, which is the due date for payment of the complaint of this case, 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act, and 15% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings, from the next day to the due date of the contract to the date of full payment.

B. As to the judgment on the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant alleged that the Defendant could not accept the Plaintiff’s claim because the Plaintiff did not actually remit money to the Defendant, even though the Plaintiff stated that he lent money to the Defendant in consultation with C, and thus, the Defendant also argued that the Plaintiff cannot accept the claim.