1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 5,000,000 and that on September 8, 2012.

1. On January 10, 2007, the Plaintiff issued a merchandise coupon of KRW 70 million (hereinafter “instant merchandise coupon”) to the Defendant, and received a custody certificate stating “the merchandise coupon of KRW 70 million” from the Defendant (hereinafter “certificate of custody”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Gap evidence No. 1

2. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff extended a cash of KRW 70 million to the defendant on January 10, 2007 and agreed to receive payment six months later, and the defendant delivered the certificate of custody stating that "the merchandise coupons 70 million shall be kept in full with merchandise coupons." The defendant asserts that the defendant should pay to the plaintiff a loan of KRW 70 million and delay damages.

3. First of all, the defendant is responsible for 5 million won to the plaintiff, and the defendant is responsible for 5 million won to the plaintiff. The defendant is responsible for 5 million won to pay the above amount to the plaintiff.

On June 23, 2006, the remaining 65 million won was taken into account the following circumstances, namely, ① the Defendant did not have any indication to the effect that the Defendant was in custody of gift certificates, ② if the Defendant lent KRW 70 million to the Defendant as the Plaintiff’s assertion, it would be in accordance with the general rule of experience, rather than a certificate of custody, and the Plaintiff was merely issued a document of custody, even if the Plaintiff could sufficiently request the Defendant to grant a loan certificate. ③ On June 23, 2006, the Defendant prepared and issued a confirmation to the Plaintiff that “if the Defendant causes principal loss due to investments in the goods of KRW 70,000,000,000,000,000,0000 won, it was in line with the general rule of experience.”