A. The defendant borrowed a Japanese currency of one million won from the plaintiff around September 2008, and the defendant does not dispute between the parties to pay the plaintiff 400,000, or may recognize the payment of the plaintiff 400,000,000 as a whole in the statement of Gap evidence No. 1 (including the provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply).

According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay 60,000 U.S. dollars to the plaintiff. The plaintiff claims for conversion into Korean currency. In this case, the conversion base date is at the time of the conclusion of fact-finding proceedings near the debtor's actual implementation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 90Da2147, Mar. 12, 1991). The defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 6,313,920 won (=6,000N x 6,000N x 1,052 won) as of January 17, 2020, which is the date of the closing of argument in this case.

B. As to this, the Defendant agreed that the Defendant would pay 600,000 UN wages which the Defendant had not received while working at the Japanese main point in the Plaintiff’s operation.

(Unless otherwise, it is alleged to the effect that the above unpaid wage claim against the plaintiff is offset against an equal amount. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge the existence of the above wage claim by the defendant and the existence of the above agreement.

2. As to the claim amounting to KRW 34,736,250

A. The fact that the Plaintiff transferred a total of KRW 34,736,250 over 12 occasions from July 28, 2009 to April 29, 201, to the Defendant’s account does not conflict between the parties, or that it may be recognized by the statement in the evidence No. 3.

B. While the plaintiff asserts that he/she lent the above money to the defendant, the defendant asserts that he/she transferred it to the defendant for the plaintiff who operates the main business in Japan at the cost of the defendant's activities in Korea.

Therefore, arguments are made in the health room and evidence No. 4.