2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. On September 15, 2014, the Plaintiff asserted that KRW 50,00,00 was loaned to the Defendant on a 36-month basis, interest rate of KRW 19.9% per annum, interest rate of arrears rate of KRW 24.9% per annum, monthly payment of KRW 1,85,630 (won 1,980,573 per annum), and interest and interest rate per repayment method (hereinafter “instant loan”), and transferred KRW 49,980,000, which was deducted from KRW 20,000 per day, to the Defendant’s post office account.

However, as the Defendant denied the instant loan and lost the benefit of time, the Defendant sought payment of the principal and interest of 49,015,885 won as of December 31, 2014 and damages for delay on the remaining principal and interest of 47,930,050 won.

The grounds for the defendant's responsibility are as follows.

(1) The instant loan is concluded by B (Defendant’s wife) and C (B) with the power of attorney granted by the Defendant directly or by the Defendant, and thus, the Defendant is liable for contractual liability.

(2) If the instant loan contract is not properly concluded, the defendant shall return the money deposited in his account as unjust enrichment unless there is a legal ground.

(3) The Defendant neglected to manage his account and passwords, thereby attempting to commit a tort related to the loan of this case, and thus, is liable for joint tort by aiding and abetting negligence.

B. The Defendant’s assertion that the instant loan was made in collusion with C, the wife B, holding the Defendant’s post account and password, thereby forging documents in the name of the Defendant. Therefore, there is no responsibility for the instant loan, and 90,129 won remaining after the Defendant’s loan deposited in the Defendant’s account is deposited in the Plaintiff’s future, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim cannot be accepted.

2. Determination

A. There is no evidence to acknowledge the authenticity of Gap evidence 1-1, 2, and 3, which is the documents related to the instant loan, as to the existence of contractual liability, and Eul and C were granted the power of representation for the conclusion of the instant loan contract by the defendant.