1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. There is no dispute between the parties to the facts of recognition, or the following facts are acknowledged in full view of the entries in Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings as a result of the completion of the written appraisal by the first instance appraiser D.

A. While the Plaintiff was working for a entertainment drinking club with C while running a business with C, and intended to move to E entertainment drinking club as a business president, the Plaintiff was obligated to pay back the obligation to the proprietor of the existing entertainment drinking club. In order to do so, if the Defendant lent money to the Plaintiff in advance to pay the said obligation, the Plaintiff paid back the said obligation to E entertainment drinking club and then transferred the said money to E entertainment drinking club.

B. Therefore, on May 14, 2006, the Defendant lent 40 million won to the Plaintiff as “the time the Defendant was due for the payment of KRW 40 million to the Plaintiff,” and on the same day, the Plaintiff drafted a promissory note with the same amount as the loan certificate stating “the amount of rent per day,00 million won,” and issued it to the Defendant.

C. Around that time, the Plaintiff began to work in the above E E entertainment tavern and retired from office on September 1 through October 10 of the same year.

On July 8, 2014, the Defendant sent a content-certified mail demanding the Plaintiff to repay the said loan. On July 21, 2014, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendant seeking confirmation of the absence of the said debt amounting to KRW 40 million.

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant lent 40 million won to the plaintiff on May 14, 2006, and the payment period has already expired. Thus, the plaintiff is obligated to pay the above loan 40 million won to the defendant and the damages for delay incurred from the above payment period to the date of full payment, barring any special circumstance.

On the other hand, the Plaintiff did not borrow the above loan amounting to KRW 40 million from the Defendant on the premise that the above loan certificate and the above promissory note were not written.