1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) is revoked, and the revocation part is applicable.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 17, 1986 with respect to the registration of transfer of ownership in the Defendant’s name, and with respect to the area of 314mm2 (hereinafter “F land”), on January 31, 1990, the registration of transfer of ownership in the Defendant’s name, the spouse of the Defendant, was completed on January 31, 1990.

B. On the other hand, on the other hand, on December 9, 1989, the registration of the creation of the right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant right to collateral security”) of the debtor I (the plaintiff and the defendant’s mother), the mortgagee’s net agricultural cooperative, the maximum debt amount of 45 million won was completed, and on November 20, 2003, the registration of alteration of the right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant right to collateral security”) of the debtor was completed.

C. On May 6, 2012, the Plaintiff and the Defendant drafted a real estate sales contract (a certificate No. 5; hereinafter “instant sales contract”) with the content that KRW 110 million shall be paid on May 25, 2012, and the remainder KRW 57 million shall be paid on June 15, 2012 to the seller at the time of a contract for purchase price of KRW 110 million for E land and KRW 30 million for the remainder payment of KRW 20 million for the contract for down payment of KRW 25,000,000,000,000,000 for the remainder payment, and the said sales contract was concluded with the seller at the time of the contract for sale and purchase, and the remainder shall be paid to the seller with

‘The contents' include the contents. D.

With respect to the instant sales contract, the Defendant paid KRW 3 million to the Plaintiff KRW 20 million on May 6, 2012, KRW 20 million on May 25, 2012, KRW 36,593,85 out of the remainder on June 15, 2012, and the registration of establishment of the instant root was cancelled on October 31, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 3, 5 through 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the Plaintiff’s principal claim for loans

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff lent KRW 65 million to the Defendant from around 1985 to 2001, and the Defendant promised to pay KRW 20 million to the Plaintiff. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff a loan or agreed amount of KRW 20 million.

B. We examine the judgment, as seen in the following 3., the plaintiff and the defendant aim at settling the relationship between the previous claims and obligations.