1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

The defendant.

The gist of the parties’ assertion was that the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff’s total amount of KRW 250,000,000 (==100,000,000 (in the first instance trial, KRW 130,000) on January 9, 2015, but the Defendant changed the assertion to KRW 100,000,000 on the appellate trial.

() Around August 2016, KRW 130,00,000 was borrowed and repaid only KRW 6,000,000,000 on August 30, 2016.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff KRW 250,000,000 and damages for delay.

When the defendant was investigated as a suspicion of arranging sexual traffic, the plaintiff concluded a loan agreement with the defendant for consumption with fear that criminal proceeds should be confiscated, and the defendant kept criminal proceeds.

Therefore, since a loan contract for consumption concluded formally constitutes a contract that violates good morals and other social order, payment according thereto constitutes illegal consideration and thus, the Plaintiff cannot seek a return thereof to the Defendant.

The facts that the Defendant borrowed KRW 100,000,000 from the Plaintiff around January 9, 2015 are acknowledged by adding up the purport of the entire pleadings to the evidence No. 1, No. 1, and No. 1, No. 2.

Meanwhile, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant lent KRW 130,000,000 to the Defendant around July 12, 2016 and prepared a loan certificate therefor, and the Defendant asserted that the loan certificate, as of July 12, 2016, was prepared by the Defendant to verify the total sum of the amounts received from the Plaintiff as of the time of the lending, and that the Defendant did not borrow additional KRW 130,00,000 from the Plaintiff.

In light of the following circumstances, the court below's conclusion that the defendant borrowed KRW 130,00,00,000 to the plaintiff on July 12, 2016, in full view of the following facts: (a) Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2, Gap evidence 5-1, Gap evidence 5-1, Gap evidence 8-1, and witness C, part of testimony of the first instance trial, Eul, and D, the G association of this court, and the result of each response to the submission of financial transaction information to H association.