1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is the same as the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the determination of addition under paragraph (2) as to the assertion emphasized by the defendant in this court.

2. Additional determination

A. The Defendant’s assertion that the deceased did not lend KRW 250 million to the Defendant, but invested in the Defendant’s teaching system on the premise of marriage with the Defendant and the Defendant’s restaurant opening.

There was no interest agreement at the time.

Since then, it is harsh that only the text messages sent in the course of hedge are required to bear the obligation of the loan to the defendant.

B. According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which cited the Kakakao Stockholm from September 2, 2018 to October 27, 2018, the deceased’s death day (the portion of the installment repayment promise for KRW 50 million in relation to the 50,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 won in total, and the monthly interest of KRW 8,300,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 won in total, were determined as follows: (a) around September 2, 2018, the Defendant recognized that the above amount was repaid to the deceased at least KRW 25,00,000,000,000,000,000,000 won in total, calculated on two occasions according to the annual interest rate of KRW 5,000,000.

F. The Defendant’s duty to return to each of the Plaintiff 75 million won can be fully recognized. This court’s application of the Defendant’s order to submit documents is insufficient to reverse the recognition of the above lending relationship between the Deceased and the Defendant, who submitted the Plaintiffs upon the request of the Defendant, from August 1, 2017 to January 31, 2018.