A. On June 29, 2013, the Plaintiff lent KRW 2,000,00 to the Defendant on June 29, 2013, there is no dispute between the parties (the Defendant alleged in a trial that the confession was against the truth and due to mistake, so it is not sufficient to recognize that the confession was made against the truth and due to mistake, and there is no other evidence to recognize that the confession was made due to mistake, and there is no effect of revoking the confession). The Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff the above loans KRW 2,00,000,000, and damages for delay.

B. The defendant asserted that the defendant paid the above loan debt upon the plaintiff's request by paying the above amount to the plaintiff's friendship C, but it is not sufficient to recognize the claim for payment only with the evidence No. 1 (Recording file), and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

2. On October 10, 2013, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff lent KRW 2,00,000,000 to the Defendant on October 10, 2013. According to the evidence evidence No. 1-2, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 2,00,000 to the Defendant’s account on the above date.

However, in regard to the process of paying the above money, the defendant merely received unpaid benefits and did not receive loans. Considering the above circumstances, it is not sufficient to recognize that the plaintiff paid the above money to the defendant's account solely on the ground that the plaintiff paid the above amount of KRW 2,00,000 to the defendant's account for a period of one year (the third argument of the court of first instance) and there is no other evidence to support this.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim for this part is rejected.

3. As to the claim of KRW 1,819,561, the Plaintiff did not deposit the money that the Defendant received from the customer while working in the Plaintiff’s workplace with the Plaintiff.