1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

Judgment of the first instance.

1. The parties' assertion

A. On April 6, 1990, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff lent KRW 10,000,000 to the Defendant at interest rate of KRW 100,000 per month, and received KRW 3,700,000 from the Defendant.

Therefore, the defendant is obliged to pay the remaining principal to the plaintiff KRW 6,300,000.

B. The Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant borrowed money from the Plaintiff is merely KRW 6,000,000, and there is no agreement to pay interest.

From June 12, 1990 to May 23, 1993, the Defendant paid 5,200,000 won and 8,000,000 won paid in Hongcheon Cresh, and 6,00,000,000 won, as repayment of the borrowed principal, and the Plaintiff’s assertion of the loan was fully repaid.

In addition, the Plaintiff’s alleged loan expired after the lapse of ten years from April 6, 1990, and the Defendant paid KRW 2,000,000 to the Plaintiff on June 9, 2008, and KRW 1,500,000 to the Plaintiff on October 7, 201, the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff with an indication of the margin for borrowing the interest free of interest for the past three years at the Plaintiff’s request, and does not constitute waiver of the statute of limitations interest, such as the repayment of debt.

2. Determination

A. With respect to the money that the Plaintiff lent to the Defendant, No. 3 (Transaction Nos. 3 (Transaction No. 3) is a document voluntarily prepared by the Plaintiff in connection with the instant lawsuit, and it is difficult to believe it as is. It is insufficient to recognize the fact that the Plaintiff’s loan to the Defendant exceeds KRW 10,000,000,000, which is more than KRW 6,000,000, and there is no evidence to acknowledge it otherwise.

Therefore, the amount that the Plaintiff lent to the Defendant is KRW 6,00,000 (hereinafter “instant loan”). B.

As to whether there was an interest agreement on the instant loan, it is difficult to readily conclude that there was an interest agreement on the instant loan solely based on the fact that the Defendant paid KRW 200,000 to the Plaintiff several times, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the agreement.

C. The instant case.