1. The Defendant’s KRW 17,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from November 30, 2017 to June 23, 2018 to the Plaintiff.

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion asserts that the Defendant lent a total of KRW 45,910,00 on several occasions to the Defendant with interest rate of KRW 3% per month as follows, and that 9,200,000 paid out was appropriated for the payment of interest, and that the Plaintiff sought the principal and the remainder interest.

around March 7, 201 and lent 26,810,000 won on April 25, 201 through December 15, 2011 + 11,60,000 won on April 25, 2011 + 500,000 won + 00,000 won on April 26, 201 + 00,000 won on May 31, 201; 200,000 + 80,000,000 won on June 9, 201 + 200,000 won on June 1, 200, 200,000 + 13,000 won on loan from around October 25, 201 to 10, 2005; and 3,000 won on loan from around 16, 201 to 3,010.

2. Determination

A. Whether the Defendant’s loan obligation is recognized (i.e., the Plaintiff’s husband’s statement of No. 1-1, which corresponds to the Plaintiff’s assertion, is merely that the Plaintiff’s husband prepared, and thus, cannot be believed as it is. Next, the circumstance that the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant in relation thereto and withdrawn (see the evidence No. 3) is insufficient to recognize the fact that the Plaintiff’s claim

(A) The Plaintiff did not submit any material even though the instant court urged the Plaintiff to submit the details of the financial materials in support of the respective loan claims. However, according to the evidence evidence No. 2, it is recognized that the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a text message stating that “the remainder of KRW 17,000,000,000, remaining after the loan amounting to KRW 30,000,000, would be repaid in installments within the future year.” Thus, the principal of the borrowed money that the Defendant would return to the Plaintiff may be deemed KRW 17,00,000.

B. (i) The repayment period or interest agreement between the original Defendant is the scope of the specific obligation to return.