1. From July 6, 2016 to November 1, 2016, the Defendant’s KRW 5.7 million to the Plaintiff, as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5.7 million.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 15, 2015, the Plaintiff became aware of the Defendant, who was working in the event site of the Ganyang tree festivals.

The defendant had requested the plaintiff to print and sell the propy photographs or photographs of visitors on the same day and to lend money to the plaintiff.

B. On September 16, 2015, the Plaintiff lent KRW 350,00 to the Defendant.

(No. 2: A copy of the interrogation protocol of suspect: No. 4).

The Plaintiff lent KRW 5 million to the Defendant around September 17, 2015.

(C) fact that there is no dispute. D.

On September 21, 2015, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 12 million to C who works together with the Defendant.

(A) Evidence No. 1, e.

On September 25, 2015, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 1,400,000 to the account in the name of D.

(A) No. 1. F. The Plaintiff lent KRW 350,000 to the Defendant around October 3, 2015.

(B) No. 2: A copy of the interrogation protocol of suspect; 7 pages). 【No dispute exists with the court; No. 2; and No. 1 and 3

2. Upon the Defendant’s request, the Plaintiff claimed KRW 700,000,000,000 each of the KRW 3.5 million on September 16, 2015 and October 3, 2015; KRW 5 million on September 17, 2015; and KRW 12 million on September 21, 2015, respectively.

Meanwhile, at the request of the defendant, the plaintiff paid or settled the various expenses that the defendant spent on behalf of the defendant during the exhibition of decentralization. The sum of the expenses reaches KRW 3,477,300.

3. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The facts acknowledged earlier are as follows: (a) the Plaintiff lent KRW 3,50,000 to the Defendant each of the loans of September 16, 2015 and October 3, 2015 and KRW 5,00,000,000 to the loan of KRW 5,70,000 to the Defendant on September 17, 2015.

Therefore, barring special circumstances, the defendant is obligated to return it to the plaintiff.

In this regard, there is no evidence to acknowledge the fact of repayment (No. 2) in the police investigation process that the defendant stated that he/she would have paid 350,000 won on October 3, 2015 immediately following the following day.

B. A loan of KRW 12 million as of September 21, 2015 is owned by the Plaintiff in the name of C on September 21, 2015.