1. As to the Plaintiff’s KRW 15.2 million and its KRW 14.5 million among them, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 1,5.5 million from October 1, 2009, and KRW 7 million from October 1, 2014.

1. The facts of recognition are as follows: (a) the Defendant borrowed KRW 24.5 million from the Plaintiff, a representative of the Defendant’s wife C (former name: D) at the time of August 7, 2009, and set the due date for payment in September 2009; (b) the Defendant transferred KRW 8 million on November 9, 2009 to the Agricultural Cooperative Account (E) and KRW 10 million on December 12 of the same month; (c) the Plaintiff transferred the said money to the Plaintiff’s account; and (d) the Plaintiff transferred KRW 21.5 million from the money to the Defendant’s account on May 21, 2012; and (e) the Defendant transferred the money to the Defendant’s account on November 9, 2009.

6.16. Diplomatic Affairs

7. Each 700,000 won may be recognized as the fact of transferring the sum of KRW 1.4 million to the Plaintiff’s account.

2. The parties' assertion

A. On September 7, 2008, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff lent KRW 1.5 million to the Defendant for the purpose of paying a fine (hereinafter “loan 1”), KRW 24.5 million for the purpose of apartment purchase fund (hereinafter “second loan”), and KRW 2.1 million for the purpose of paying interest on May 21, 2012 (hereinafter “third loan”). Since the Defendant paid only KRW 1.4 million among the loans 3, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 26.7 million (= KRW 1.5 million) and damages for delay.

B. The Defendant asserted that the Defendant borrowed KRW 24.5 million from the Plaintiff to the apartment purchase fund, and paid KRW 10 million in cash via C’s account and KRW 4.5 million, the remainder of the loan remaining after the Defendant paid KRW 10 million. As long as C divorced from the Defendant claimed a division of property against the Defendant, it shall be deemed that the Defendant is liable only for half of the above amount borrowed from the apartment purchase fund during the marital life.

3. Determination

A. Since there is no evidence to prove that the Plaintiff lent KRW 1,500,000 to the portion of the first loan claim, this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is rejected.

(b) The obligor specified for the second claim for the loan.