2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. The Plaintiff began to associate with the Defendant on May 2013, and came to be hedging with the Defendant in early 2016.

B. On June 26, 2013, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 5,00,000,000 to the Defendant’s fatherC’s account, KRW 1,000,000 on August 30, 2014, and KRW 2,000,00 on March 21, 2015, respectively. The Plaintiff remitted KRW 2,00,000,000 to the Defendant’s account on May 22, 2015, and KRW 8,50,00 on August 26, 2015, respectively.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without a partial dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, the result of the plaintiff party's personal examination, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment of the Plaintiff are as follows: the Defendant’s first-B from the Plaintiff.

As stated in the claim, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay the remainder of KRW 17,850,000 (=21,400,000 - 3,550,000) and damages for delay, since the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 21,40,00 and repaid KRW 3,550,00 among them to the Plaintiff.

However, the above evidence and evidence Nos. 3 and 4 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 92Da12070, Apr. 13, 1993; 92Da12070, Apr. 13, 1993; 2008Da12070, Apr. 13, 2009) dispute with “the site” as to the evidence Nos. 4 from the date of the second pleading (the date of the second pleading of this case, Apr. 5, 2017). However, in light of the following circumstances, the defendant's argument that the whole purport of each of the statements No. 3 and No. 4 in this case is more known, it is difficult to conclude that the defendant borrowed KRW 17,850,00 from the plaintiff as alleged by the plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to support the facts.

① The Plaintiff’s economic power is difficult in light of the circumstances.