2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant B in this court.

2. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B

A. A loan for consumption is established when the lender agrees to transfer the ownership of money or any other substitute to the other party and the borrower agrees to return the same kind, quality, and quantity of goods (Article 598 of the Civil Act). Therefore, a loan for consumption is not established only where the borrower has to give and receive money, etc. in reality, or where the borrower has actually been able to do so.

(See Supreme Court Decisions 90Da14652 Decided April 9, 191, and 2015Da73098 Decided December 27, 2018, etc.). However, a loan for consumption with interest is a bilateral contract under which the lender bears the obligation to transfer ownership of the money to the borrower, and the borrower bears the obligation to return the money in the same amount to the lender and to pay interest thereon, and the obligation of the lender and the borrower is a quid pro quo relationship. Thus, in order for the lender to seek the return of the loan and payment of interest thereon, not only the fact that the lender entered into a loan for consumption, but also the fact that the lender has paid the loan to the borrower and all the timing for payment must be attested.

B. The reason why this court should explain this part of the loan for consumption between the plaintiff and the defendant B is the same as the entry in the third to fourth to fourth of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is accepted pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. However, the loan contract between the plaintiff and the defendant B was concluded with the content that the above defendant borrowed 40 million won from the plaintiff on December 30, 2006 as the interest rate rate of 2% and the due date of repayment on August 20, 2007 (hereinafter "the contract of this case").