1. The defendant's KRW 78,130,00 for the plaintiff and 5% per annum from July 1, 2020 to December 11, 2020 for the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 2, 2016, the Defendant: (a) drafted and delivered, respectively, a loan certificate stating that “the Defendant borrowed KRW 7,000,000 from the Plaintiff as an obligor; (b) paid the said money until August 25, 2017; and (c) paid interest at 25% per annum on the 5th day of each month; and (d) would lose the benefit of time if the interest is overdue at least once, even if the interest is overdue,” and a loan certificate stating that “the Defendant borrowed KRW 2,450,00 from the Plaintiff as an obligor,” and “the Defendant borrowed KRW 2,450,00 from the Plaintiff as an obligor (Evidence 1-2, 200; hereinafter “the second loan certificate”).

B. The Plaintiff, like the details of remittance attached Table 1, remitted total of KRW 82,060,00 from April 7, 2016 to October 6, 2016 to the Defendant, and the Plaintiff asserted that the details of the remittance to the Defendant during the said period were KRW 82,072,50,000. However, according to the entries in the evidence No. 2, the above remittance constitutes a trupt transfer, and all of the parts of KRW 900 and KRW 500 out of each remittance amount are deemed to be the commission for trupt transfer, and the amount is recognized as the remittance amount.

The Defendant received KRW 13,380,000 in total from April 22, 2016 to February 11, 2017, as indicated in attached Table 2, as indicated in attached Table 2.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. On January 5, 2016, the Plaintiff lent KRW 82,072,50,00 to the Defendant. From April 7, 2016 to October 6, 2016, the Plaintiff wired KRW 82,072,50 to the Defendant. The Defendant paid only KRW 13,380,000 to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the Defendant should pay to the Plaintiff the difference of KRW 81,142,50 (i.e., KRW 82,072,50,000, KRW 13,380,000) and damages for delay.

B. The money transferred or delivered by the Plaintiff to the Defendant is not a loan under a loan for consumption.

The plaintiff transferred money to the defendant with the knowledge of the fact that the defendant was operating a card-based seating business by using the above money.