As a punishment, the plaintiff and the defendant are punished by the defendant, and they are in charge or C.

On March 11, 2008, the Plaintiff sent KRW 50,000,000 to the Defendant by account transfer. The Plaintiff was immediately returned KRW 10,000,000.

During the period from December to February 2010, 2007, the Defendant was registered as an employee of D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) operated by the Plaintiff and paid health and long-term care insurance premiums.

C sent text messages to E, who is a director of D on October 9, 2017, and the Plaintiff lent KRW 40,000,000 to the Defendant before several years, but C was not required to pay the money to the Defendant, and C was found to have not paid the money to the Defendant.

[Grounds for recognition] There is no dispute. According to the facts of the above recognition that Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul's evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the obligation to return a loan to the defendant for determination on the ground of the entire purport of the argument, 40,000 won, from among the money that the plaintiff sent to the defendant on March 11, 2008, is recognized to have been lent to the defendant by the plaintiff, and the entry of Eul's evidence No. 4 does not interfere with the above recognition and there is no other counter-

In light of the fact that the Plaintiff did not receive the principal and interest for about 10 years, the Defendant well-known that the said money is not a loan, and the Defendant asserts that there is no reason to borrow KRW 40,00,000 from the Plaintiff. However, as seen earlier, the Plaintiff’s demand for repayment through the Plaintiff, as seen earlier, was the same as in the Plaintiff’s demand for a long-term principal and interest payment. Therefore, it cannot be said that the lending itself is not recognized on the ground that the Plaintiff was not paid the principal and interest for a long period of time, and the remaining circumstances of the Defendant’

Therefore, the defendant is 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from April 7, 2017 to the date of full payment, which is clear that the original copy of the instant payment order was served on the defendant for the above loan 40,000,000 won to the plaintiff.