A. On November 13, 2018, the Plaintiff leased KRW 40,000,000 in total, and KRW 15,000,000,00 on January 7, 2019, to the Defendant.

In addition to the repayment of a total of KRW 3,00,000 on six occasions from December 18, 2018 to June 12, 2019, the Defendant has not yet repaid the remainder.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 37,000,000 with the loan and damages for delay.

B. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion is the loan of KRW 25,00,000,00, which the Plaintiff remitted on November 13, 2018, but not the loan, KRW 15,000,00, which was remitted on January 7, 2019, not the loan, but the investment for the business that the Defendant was running.

Therefore, the part of the claim on the premise that the amount of KRW 15,00,000 remitted on January 7, 2019 is a loan to the defendant is without merit.

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff, on November 13, 2018, remitted KRW 25,000,000 to the Defendant’s name account, and KRW 15,000,000 on January 15, 2019, respectively.

On December 18, 2018, the Defendant transferred KRW 3,00,000, totaling KRW 500,000 on March 8, 2019, KRW 500,000 on March 22, 2019, KRW 500,000 on April 222, 2019, KRW 50,000 on May 17, 2019, and KRW 3,000,00 on June 21, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings

B. The key issue of the instant case is that the Plaintiff transferred KRW 25,00,000 to the Defendant on November 13, 2018, and the Plaintiff received KRW 3,000,000 in total on six occasions from the Defendant during the period from December 18, 2018 to June 21, 2019.

Ultimately, the issue of the instant case is whether the Plaintiff was a loan of KRW 15,000,000, which was remitted to the Defendant on January 7, 2019.

C. (1) The exchange of money between the parties can be made on the basis of various legal causes, such as loans for consumption, investment, donation, repayment, etc., and the fact that money has been given and received by the parties alone.