A. The Defendant loaned money to the Plaintiff that it is necessary to operate a car page. Accordingly, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 36,00,000 from June 29, 2015 to February 14, 2017.

However, the Defendant paid only KRW 12,00,000 and did not pay the remainder KRW 24,000,000,000 among them, and thus, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay the Plaintiff damages for delay from April 21, 2018, which is the day following the maturity of the time limit for repayment demanded by the Defendant through the content-certified mail on April 6, 2018.

B. The borrowing of money from the Plaintiff was not the Defendant but D, the president of the Neum Center that the Defendant had worked as the Defendant’s accounting.

The defendant is nothing more than giving a cash card to D upon the request of the above D to use the defendant's name account.

2. According to the evidence Nos. 2 and 3, it is recognized that the Plaintiff remitted the sum of KRW 29,430,000 to the account under the name of the Defendant from June 30, 2015 to February 14, 2017.

However, in light of the following circumstances, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff lent KRW 36,00,000 including the money that the Plaintiff remitted to the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

① The Plaintiff filed a complaint against the Defendant on suspicion of fraud, and during the investigation process, D borrowed money from the Plaintiff that he would pay back to the Plaintiff, and made a statement consistent with the Defendant’s assertion that he could not engage in the transaction of passbook, and was using the Defendant’s account.

② During the above investigation process, D received a letter from the person who appears to have made the plaintiff's male appearance to repay the money to the complainant.