In full view of the purport of the arguments in Gap evidence 1 and Eul evidence 1, the defendant sent the message to the defendant on April 1, 2016 that the plaintiff and D would take legal measures E. The defendant sent to the defendant on April 1, 2016. The defendant sent the message "I't have been able to solve the problem because there is no settlement of the money because there is no settlement of the money." On April 11, 2016, the plaintiff sent the message "I't have been able to hear the message of "I't have been able to pay the plaintiff the money at the rate of 10,000 won from the next day of the argument that I would not be able to pay the money to the plaintiff at the rate of 15,000 won until 20,000 won, since the defendant sent the message of this case to the defendant on April 25, 2016, and the defendant could have been 100,000 won to the plaintiff by the agreement of 205%.

(1) The plaintiff argues that there was an agreement to return the principal after 3 months from September 14, 2009, but there is no evidence to acknowledge this, and that part of the claim is without merit). 2. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is accepted within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.