(a) Facts under the basis of facts are either in dispute between the parties or in accordance with Gap evidence Nos. 1, 8, 11, 12, and 13, with a comprehensive view to the purport of the entire pleadings.

1) From around 2002 to 2004, the Plaintiff lent a total of KRW 261,540,000 to the Defendant with purchase funds of KRW 39,52 square meters in Gangseo-gun C. In addition to the loans described in the foregoing paragraph (2) 1, the Plaintiff paid a total of KRW 261,540,00 to the Defendant as shown in the attached Table between 2001 and 2004, and received KRW 77,60,000 from the Defendant for the same period. (3) On July 17, 2009, the Defendant drafted a loan certificate to the Plaintiff that borrowed KRW 50,000 to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the instant loan certificate”).

4) On September 7, 2010, the Plaintiff sent a certificate of intent to pay KRW 500 million to the Defendant within 10 days of the loan certificate, which reaches the Defendant around that time. B) At the time of the preparation of the loan certificate, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 240 million to the Defendant and additionally paid KRW 183,940,000 (=261,540,000- 77,600,000) to the Defendant, and barring any special circumstance, the existence and content of the intent should be acknowledged in accordance with the language where the content of the contract is written in writing as a disposal document (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da64253, Oct. 15, 2015). In full view of the following, the Plaintiff, at the time of the creation of the loan certificate, shall be deemed to have been drafted between the Plaintiff and the Defendant and the Defendant’s promise to repay the loan amount of KRW 500,000,700.