1. There is no loan obligation of KRW 105,00,000 on December 29, 2017 against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) by the Defendant (Counterclaim Defendant).

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff and C prepared a written confirmation of payment plan (hereinafter “written confirmation of payment plan”) on November 28, 2017 and sent it to the Defendant after signing each of the “inbound” and “sureties”. The Defendant signed the “receiving person” column and sent it to the Plaintiff again.

B. A written confirmation of a payment plan includes each of the “amount: 105,00,000 won,” “Temporary: 29, 2017.12.12.29,” and “payment method: D’s name, Busan Bank under the name of D, Busan Bank under the name of F, F’s name, and National Bank under the name of G, and the “receiving person” column of confirmation. The Defendant, “inland” column, the Plaintiff, and the “sureties” column respectively are written in the corresponding column. The names of the Defendant, the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff and C are written in the corresponding column.

C. On December 29, 2017, the Plaintiff remitted the total of KRW 26,250,000,000 to D, E, F, and G, respectively.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy Facts, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 3 (including satisfy numbers), Eul's witness's partial testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff run the construction business of the Defendant to the Plaintiff, and paid the Plaintiff a sum of KRW 15 million to the Defendant within one month from the loan to the Defendant, and the Plaintiff would make payment on behalf of the Defendant if the Defendant did not pay the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff prepared a written confirmation of the payment plan with the Defendant, and then remitted each of KRW 26,250,00 to D, E,F, and G, which was designated by the Defendant on December 29, 2017. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff a loan of KRW 1.5 million and its delay damages. (2) As such, the Defendant had the obligation to pay the Plaintiff a loan of KRW 1.5 million to the Defendant, but on December 29, 2017, the Defendant received a total of KRW 1.5 million under the pretext of the Defendant’s obligation to the Plaintiff on December 29, 2017, and did not borrow it.

Therefore, there is no loan obligation of 15 million won against the defendant's plaintiff on December 29, 2017.