1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 23, 2016, the Plaintiff asserted that a de facto marital relationship with C, Japan, is in a de facto marital relationship with C, and the Defendant does not dispute this part.

From the account of the defendant to the account of the defendant, 13.5 million won was remitted.

B. From the Defendant’s account to C’s account, KRW 20 million was transferred from March 3, 2016, and KRW 30 million on March 4, 2016.

C. On March 26, 2016, KRW 13.5 million was remitted from the Defendant’s account to the Defendant’s account.

The loan certificate (hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”) written by the Defendant by indicating the obligee as the Plaintiff on April 23, 2016 is written as the loan certificate that borrowed one million won ( April 28, 2016) and the following is written as follows:

B 【Ground of recognition】 Evidence A 1 to 3, Evidence B 1 (including paper numbers)

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion lent three million won to the Defendant three times, and among which, on April 23, 2016, one million won was lent to the Defendant as a check.

Since 5 million won was paid after the payment, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 2.5 million won with 15% interest per annum from the day following the service of the payment order to the day of full payment.

B. The Defendant asserted that the Defendant received KRW 31.5 million from C on February 23, 2016, and KRW 31.5 million before and after February 20, 2016. This money was repaid by remitting KRW 50 million to C’s passbook on March 3, 2016 and March 4, 2016.

After March 26, 2016, while transferring KRW 13.5 million to N, double Plaintiff transferred KRW 5 million to N around early April 2016, 2016, and KRW 300-4 million of the Plaintiff and friendly Gu’s Chinese flight aircraft table and China’s guidance were excluded from the borrowed amount.

While signing on the loan certificate of this case, the additional (20 million won) is not written by the defendant.

3. Determination

A. On April 23, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant traded money more than once, and the Defendant borrowed KRW 1 million to the Plaintiff.