1. As to KRW 4,891,420 and KRW 4,025,519 among them, the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) from February 6, 2017.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. On August 28, 2014, the Plaintiff’s spouse B entered into a loan contract with the Defendant by setting the loan principal of KRW 6,000,000, interest rate of KRW 29.20, and overdue interest rate of KRW 34.90.

(hereinafter “instant loan agreement”). (b)

On the same day as the preceding paragraph, the Defendant remitted KRW 6 million to the financial transaction account under the Plaintiff’s name in accordance with the instant loan agreement.

C. As to the instant loan agreement, payment of principal and interest was delayed from July 5, 2016, and the principal balance on the same day is KRW 4,025,519.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 5, Eul evidence 1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) B entered into the instant loan agreement without the Plaintiff’s permission, and thus, the Plaintiff’s obligation to the Defendant under the instant loan agreement does not exist.

(2) The Plaintiff did not confer any fundamental power of representation to B.

(3) The plaintiff is only the victim of a tort.

B. The Defendant’s assertion (1) The instant loan contract was duly concluded between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff, or (2) the Plaintiff conferred basic power of representation to B, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion is liable for the expression representation pursuant to Article 126 of the Civil Act.

(3) Even if not, the Plaintiff is liable for aiding and abetting B’s tort.

3. Determination

A. According to the above facts of finding that the Plaintiff entered into the instant loan contract, the Defendant’s assertion on the premise that B entered into the instant loan contract directly with the Defendant is without merit, as it is acknowledged that B had entered into the instant loan contract as the Plaintiff himself/herself.

B. (1) The expression agent under Article 126 of the Civil Act specifies the intention that an agent is for himself/herself, in determining the assertion of expression agent under Article 126 of the Civil Act.