A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) around October 2009, when the plaintiff was detained in a criminal case, the plaintiff borrowed KRW 81 million from the defendant in order to raise expenses for the criminal case from the defendant. The plaintiff was demanded by the defendant to pay KRW 81 million borrowed from the defendant, and on June 1, 2010, the plaintiff paid KRW 40 million to the defendant. The execution agent paid KRW 81 million to the defendant without knowing that the plaintiff paid KRW 40 million to the defendant around October 201. Accordingly, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff with unjust enrichment amounting to KRW 40 million and delay damages amounting to KRW 20 million from the defendant's assertion that the plaintiff was paid to the plaintiff.

B. The fact that the Plaintiff paid KRW 40 million to the Defendant on June 1, 2010 does not conflict between the parties.

However, in full view of the written statements and the purport of the entire pleadings in Eul 1 and 3, the above KRW 40 million is recognized as having been repaid to the plaintiff on June 23, 2008 by the defendant and on February 27, 2009, respectively. Thus, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

2. Claim for a loan of 30 million won;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) filed a request with F on September 10, 2009 to transfer the said money to F, thereby having F transfer the said money to the account under the name of the Defendant. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the said KRW 30 million and the damages for delay thereof. (2) The Defendant’s assertion that the said KRW 30 million was not the Defendant but the C Union borrowed, and was already repaid on December 29, 2015.

B. On September 10, 2009, the fact that the FF transferred KRW 30 million to the account under the name of the defendant upon the Plaintiff’s request is without dispute between the parties.

However, the foregoing.