1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 131,07,00 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from September 20, 2018 to the day of full payment.

1. Determination on the assertion, such as a claim

A. The following facts are acknowledged when there is no dispute between the parties to the judgment as to the cause of the claim or when the whole purport of the pleadings is added to the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4. In full view of these facts, the defendant is obligated to pay the

(1) The Plaintiff: (a) was grain on the trade name of the Plaintiff in Geum-gu, Busan; and (b) the Defendant was a person operating grain on the F market located in Seo-gu, Busan; and (c) the Plaintiff purchased rice from the Defendant.

(2) The Plaintiff did not supply the Plaintiff with rice equivalent to KRW 87,077,00,00, out of the amount of grain paid in advance to the Defendant to the Defendant on June 2015, while doing the aforementioned transaction with the Defendant.

Accordingly, on July 2, 2015, the defendant prepared a written confirmation to return an amount equivalent to KRW 90,000,000 to the plaintiff by step from July 15, 2015.

(3) On June 26, 2015, the Plaintiff received endorsement from the Defendant on a promissory note with a right of KRW 48 million that occurred in G from the Defendant, and remitted KRW 44 million to the Defendant’s management account on the same day, and lent it.

B. The defendant's assertion (1) First, the defendant asserts that the amount related to a promissory note is all included in the said KRW 90 million.

However, the evidence presented by the defendant alone is insufficient to admit the above argument.

(2) Although the Defendant’s above claim has expired a three-year extinctive prescription, it is difficult to view that it constitutes a three-year extinctive prescription, since the Plaintiff’s claim seeks a claim and a loan under an agreement to return the money already paid.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of extinctive prescription is not accepted.

C. According to the theory of lawsuit, the defendant does not set the payment date of KRW 131,07,00 [=87,077,000 Won 44,00,000] as the plaintiff seeks, and the date following the delivery date of the copy of the complaint shall be deemed as the date of the commencement of the damages for delay.