The defendant shall pay 36,90,000 won to the plaintiff and 20% per annum from July 21, 2015 to the day of complete payment.

Facts of recognition

On November 2011, the original Defendant agreed to pay the purchase price of a vehicle to the Defendant, and the Defendant purchased and reselled a used vehicle, and then to pay the Plaintiff the sales proceeds by adding 1/2 of the sales proceeds to the money received from the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter “instant agreement”). The Plaintiff paid the amount of KRW 7,00,000 to the Defendant on November 11, 201, as well as the amount of KRW 7,000,000 to the Defendant under the instant agreement, and the Plaintiff paid the amount to the Defendant on August 21, 2014; KRW 10,000,000 to the Defendant on August 21, 201, ② KRW 9,00,000 on August 31, 201; and ③

9. A total of KRW 48,200,000 on December 12, 199, ④ KRW 10,000,000 on the 14th of the same month, ⑤ KRW 7,200,000 on the 16th of the same month, and KRW 48,200,000 on the 16th of the same month (hereinafter “instant payment amount”), each payment amount is to be classified as “the instant payment amount.”

[Ground] According to the facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including branch numbers), and the judgment of the court below as to the ground for claim of the whole pleadings, the defendant is obligated to pay 43,200,000 won (48,200,000 won - 5,000,000 won) after deducting 5,000,000 won from the amount paid by the plaintiff in this case as stipulated in the agreement of this case where the plaintiff had already been paid, and damages for delay.

On November 11, 2014, the Defendant’s assertion as to the Defendant’s assertion that the purchase or resale of a high-end vehicle was conducted by the Plaintiff’s determination, and the C (a person who directly purchased a vehicle from the Defendant or arranged the purchase of a vehicle) who received the instant payment amount from the Defendant.

Therefore, the amount paid in this case is not a loan, and the plaintiff also knows the above circumstances, so the defendant is not obligated to return the amount paid in this case to the plaintiff.

On October 11, 2014, the Defendant repaid KRW 9,500,000 to the amount paid once.

Judgment

The Plaintiff, as alleged by the Defendant, may be determined on the assertion.