2. Determination

A. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court and the lower court prior to remand, the following facts can be acknowledged.

① When G was faced with an economically difficult situation due to cumulative debt owed to the victim, etc., G disposed of the instant apartment and requested the Defendant, who was in close friendship, to purchase the instant apartment in order to repay the debt with a significant interest burden.

② The Defendant, who was well aware of such circumstances, purchased G with the intent to obtain lease income after purchasing the instant apartment from G and the purchase of the apartment in question, at KRW 130 million.

③ At that time, the Defendant lent KRW 31.5 million to G at that time. In the instant apartment, the Defendant agreed to pay KRW 70 million to the Defendant by means of acquiring the obligation to return the lease deposit, which caused the lease deposit to KRW 70 million, and the secured amount to KRW 20 million by the victim’s right to collateral, H’s right to collateral, which caused the secured amount to KRW 12 million, and the secured amount to KRW 22 million by the national bank. However, the Defendant agreed to pay KRW 25 million out of the above secured amount to KRW 130 million by means of acquiring the obligation to return the lease deposit.

④ At the time of the conclusion of the instant sales contract in the first instance court and the lower court, G paid the remainder of KRW 35 million to the Defendant by subrogation for the victim and H, and obtained the understanding of the Defendant so that G may pay the principal and interest in each month as before. After that, if the Defendant’s above-mortgage was cancelled, G would directly pay the victim KRW 20 million to the victim.