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

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff loaned KRW 536,397,422 in total to the Defendant by means of remitting money from the Plaintiff’s account to the account of the Defendant or the Defendant-related person, and thus, he/she sought reimbursement of KRW 300,000,000

(A) On April 1, 2019, the Plaintiff asserted that the amount stated in A’s No. 11 was repaid by the Defendant in the preparatory document as of April 1, 2019, and on November 18, 2019, the Plaintiff asserted that KRW 205,566,920 was a loan, except for the portion claimed by the Defendant to the effect that the Defendant was paid as a profit from investment, but did not explicitly reduce the purport of the claim).

The Plaintiff and the Defendant asserted that the Defendant had been in an internal relationship for ten years, and used a mutually complementary financial account or card, so it cannot be readily concluded that the amount transferred to the Defendant’s account is a loan, and that part of the money deposited by the Plaintiff to the Defendant was received through the Plaintiff as to the fact that the Defendant invested in the truck business that was introduced to the Plaintiff.

Even if a part of the monetary transaction relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is recognized as a loan, this is limited to the case where the non-wheeled relationship is maintained, and thus becomes null and void or has been fully repaid as an act contrary to good morals

2. The following facts and circumstances, which may be recognized in light of the overall purport of the statement of Gap evidence Nos. 11, Eul evidence Nos. 4 and 10 (including Serial numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the entire purport of the pleadings, i.e., the plaintiff asserted that he lent a considerable amount of money, but the plaintiff did not prepare a loan certificate, but did not submit any data on the interest or the repayment period agreement, which is the ticket of the loan, as well as on the loan collection, and ii) the plaintiff who has a spouse, after the divorce, has entered into an internal relationship with the defendant who raises his child alone.