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

The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is subject to KRW 42,832,791.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

The Defendant asserts that the instant lawsuit is unlawful since the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed not to file a lawsuit claiming return of unjust enrichment, on the grounds that the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to bring an action claiming return of unjust enrichment.

However, there is no evidence to acknowledge the fact of the non-committee agreement, such as the defendant's assertion, and the defendant's prior defense on the merits is without merit.

The court's explanation of this part of the judgment on this claim is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the substitution of the entries in the third to fourth to fourth to fourth to the judgment of the court of first instance with the following descriptions. Thus, this part of the judgment is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

A person shall be appointed.

B. Defendant’s defense 1) As to the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff renounced or waived the right to claim return of unjust enrichment against the Defendant, the Defendant waived the right to claim return of unjust enrichment against the Defendant, or exempted the Defendant from the Defendant’s obligation to return unjust enrichment. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s filing of the instant principal claim is in violation of the good faith principle. However, according to the former Interest Limitation Act, the maximum interest rate under the contract on monetary lending is 30% per annum, and the portion above the above maximum interest rate is null and void. If the obligor voluntarily pays interest exceeding the above maximum interest rate, the amount equivalent to the interest paid in excess shall be appropriated for the principal, and even if a quasi-loan loan contract or a novation contract is concluded with respect to the amount equivalent to the interest paid in excess, the portion is not effective (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 98Da17046, Oct. 13, 1998; 2012Da81203, Feb. 14, 2013; 2014Da2306.