1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Facts of recognition

Plaintiff

A on August 16, 2012, with the Defendant, entered into a monetary loan agreement with the Defendant on August 15, 2013, stipulating that KRW 150 million shall be due and payable on August 15, 2013 and 3% (payment on August 1, 2013) of the interest accrued, and the Defendant borrowed from the Defendant (hereinafter “the instant loan”). The Plaintiff B jointly and severally guaranteed the Plaintiff’s obligation of the instant loan.

In order to secure the payment of the borrowed amount of this case, the Plaintiffs prepared, as the No. 1588, a deed of promissory notes (hereinafter “the No. 1 No. 1”) with a face value of KRW 195 million on August 16, 2012, by a notary public, to the Defendant (hereinafter “the No. 1 No. 1 notarial deed”) to secure the payment of the borrowed amount of this case.

On the same day as the date of the loan agreement in this case, the Defendant entered into a management consulting agreement with the Plaintiff A to provide management consulting services to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff A to pay the Defendant KRW 8 million per month as advisory fees to the Defendant on the fifth day of each month.

(2) On May 1, 2013, Plaintiff A prepared and issued a promissory note No. 1031 (hereinafter “the Second No. notarial deed of this case”) with a face value of KRW 260,000,000 (hereinafter “the Second No. notarial deed of this case”) on May 1, 2013, in order to secure the payment of the loan debt of this case and the advisory debt under the consulting contract of this case.

[Grounds for recognition] Fact-finding, Gap evidence Nos. 1-2, Eul evidence Nos. 4 and 6, the argument of the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the judgment of the parties concerned, and the amount of the borrowed money of this case actually borrowed by the plaintiffs Gap, who asserted by the parties concerned, is KRW 130 million, and the plaintiffs asserted that the amount of the borrowed money of this case was deducted from the interest rate of KRW 20 million. However, in light of the purport of the whole pleadings, the plaintiffs' assertion is cited as above.

The interest rate of 30% per annum, which is the highest interest rate under the Interest Limitation Act, paid by Plaintiff A with respect to the above borrowed money to the Defendant, and the debt of the borrowed money in this case shall be repaid in the order of principal.