Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 20 million won with 5% per annum from November 18, 2017 to February 13, 2019, which is the day following the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, and 15% per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment.

(2) On June 2, 2008, the Plaintiff claimed damages for delay from June 3, 2008, but there is no evidence to prove that the period of repayment was agreed in accordance with the above assertion, and thus, the Defendant’s counterclaim claim is accepted from the day after the delivery date of the copy of the complaint of this case. The Defendant asserted that, around June 2008, the Plaintiff agreed to pay the instant vehicle in lieu of the repayment of the instant loan obligation, and the Plaintiff transferred the instant vehicle to the Plaintiff, thereby seeking the acquisition of the transfer of ownership registration procedure.

However, there is no evidence to prove that the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to pay the instant vehicle in lieu of the repayment of the instant loan obligation.

(1) On the first day for pleading of the instant case, the Defendant asserted to the effect that the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 6 million from C as collateral and received payment in kind. However, it is insufficient to recognize that there was an agreement on payment in kind between the Plaintiff and the Defendant solely on such ground. Therefore, the Defendant’s counterclaim claim is groundless.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's main claim is accepted within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining main claim and the defendant's counterclaim are dismissed as all are without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.