1. The Defendant’s KRW 50,000,000 and its amount annually from April 5, 2017 to July 13, 2018 to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 23, 2015, the Defendant issued to C an electronic bill number D, face value 250,000,000, and the due date on January 30, 2016, which is a financial institution E-bank requesting the payment. On November 3, 2015, the Defendant issued an electronic bill, which is a financial institution E-bank requesting the payment. On November 3, 2015, the portion of KRW 50,000,000, which was divided and transferred to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff

(hereinafter “instant bill”). (b)

On February 1, 2016, the defendant filed an accident report with respect to the above bill.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 4 and 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the defendant, the drawer of the bill of this case, is obligated to pay the amount of KRW 50,000,000 to the plaintiff, who is the holder of the bill of this case, and delay damages therefor, unless there are special circumstances.

On the other hand, as to the starting date of the payment for delay, the statutory interest rate under the Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes Act may be claimed from the day following the date on which the payment for delay was actually performed (the date on which the payment was presented). However, there is no proof of assertion by the plaintiff. Thus, the defendant is liable to pay damages for delay from April 5, 2017, which is the day following the date on which the copy of the bill of this case can be seen

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 50,000,000 won and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 6% per annum under the Commercial Act from April 5, 2017 to July 13, 2018, which is the date when the instant judgment is rendered, and 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings, from the following day to the date when the Defendant has fully repaid its obligations.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant’s summary of the assertion that the instant bill was without any accompanying obligation for security purposes, at the request of the limited liability company G (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) that entered into a contract for construction of a mining-type warehouse located in the F in Yangyang-si (hereinafter “instant construction”).