1. The Defendant’s KRW 60 million and its interest to the Plaintiff is 18% per annum from January 22, 2008 to October 7, 2014.

1. The plaintiff asserts that on November 22, 2007, the plaintiff provided a loan of KRW 60 million to the defendant at an annual interest rate of 18%.

Although the defendant received the above money, it is true that it is the money of the network C, and the defendant did not borrow money from the plaintiff.

In other words, the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the network C, D, and E-5 shared the instant land by inheritance from their parents, which was 1228 square meters prior to the Flux of Gangseo-gu Busan Metropolitan Government Fluxa (hereinafter “instant land”). However, around February 2001, the Plaintiff arbitrarily transferred the instant land to its own sole owner.

After April 2007, the Plaintiff sold the instant land to the Defendant and proposed to settle the sales price, and sold the said land at KRW 460 million.

Nevertheless, as the plaintiff did not pay the net C share settlement, it was demanded that the defendant lend the money to the defendant, and the defendant borrowed the money to the plaintiff through the plaintiff.

2. The following facts can be acknowledged, or there is no dispute between the parties, according to the respective descriptions of Gap evidence 1, 2, and Eul evidence 2:

In other words, the plaintiff and the defendant are between each other, and the network C is composed of the plaintiff and the defendant.

On November 22, 2007, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 60 million to the Defendant under his own name.

At the time, the defendant agreed to pay interest of 1.5% per month, i.e. 18% per annum.

On October 23, 2008, the defendant remitted 1.8 million won interest for two months to the account under the name of the plaintiff.

D and E (the deceased C’s successors are not the Plaintiff) filed a claim against the Plaintiff for payment of an amount equivalent to their share ratio out of the proceeds from the sale of the instant land as unjust enrichment or agreed money, alleging the facts alleged earlier as to the instant land, as seen earlier by the Defendant (Seoul District Court 2012Gahap10754). The registration in the name of the Plaintiff as to the instant land is without the consent of the remaining siblings.