A. On 2007, the Plaintiff lent KRW 50 million to the Defendant as the acquisition price.

Since then, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 10 million to the Defendant, on April 15, 2008, received KRW 20 million from the Defendant, and on September 15, 2012, lent KRW 23 million to the Defendant.

Therefore, the defendant should pay 63 million won in total to the plaintiff.

B. The plaintiff and the defendant also agreed to accept C from D.

The plaintiff delivered the money to D to the defendant, and the defendant paid KRW 50 million from August 2, 2007 to September 9, 2007 to KRW 13 million on December 31, 2007, and the defendant paid to D an investment amount of KRW 150 million by adding his money to his money and the plaintiff.

Therefore, since the Plaintiff’s paid-in money is an investment loan, the Defendant is not obligated to repay the money to the Plaintiff.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff’s transfer of money to the Defendant is a loan, and the testimony of the witness E is insufficient to reverse it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. In light of the following circumstances, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff’s transfer of money to the Defendant is a loan, and the statement of Nos. 3 and 4 and the witness E are insufficient to reverse it.

If the Plaintiff and the Defendant made an investment together, it would be in line with the empirical rule that the Plaintiff directly made an investment to D and received an investment confirmation from D.

However, the plaintiff did not pay money directly to D, and only the defendant paid money to D with his or her husband F's account.

In addition, it received a letter from February 1, 2012 that only the Defendant grants the principal of KRW 150 million and interest KRW 1.8 million each month from March 25, 2014.

The Defendant issued to the Plaintiff a certificate of the right to register real estate in F’s name.

However, this is a typical act of the debtor to ensure the creditor's security or conviction in repayment, and if the plaintiff and the defendant are joint investors, and they do not have any obligation against the plaintiff.