1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 100,000,000 as well as 20% per annum from July 25, 2014 to the day of full payment.

1. Basic facts and the allegations of the Parties

A. On May 31, 2012, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 100 million to the Defendant.

(No dispute exists and No. 1) B.

The plaintiff and the defendant asserts the reason for the remittance of the above money as follows:

(1) The plaintiff asserts that the defendant, who was known in Pyeongtaek-gu, lent the amount of money to be paid as the sale price at the time of the purchase in his own name of Busan So-gu C Apartment 69.

(2) On the other hand, the defendant proposed that the plaintiff, who had been aware of the year 2012 and maintained an internal relationship with the defendant, purchased the above apartment in a convenient way with the defendant, and that he would purchase it in the name of the defendant and bear approximately KRW 800 million of the purchase price ( KRW 700 million of the sale price, KRW 100 million of the sale price, KRW 70 million of the sale price, and KRW 100 million of the sale price). The defendant claimed that he donated the above money

2. Based on each of the documents submitted by the Plaintiff and the Defendant and the evidence attached thereto, there is no room to view that the Plaintiff and the Defendant maintained the relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant around 2012 as the Defendant asserted.

However, in this article, the defendant did not submit any particular evidence to presume whether the relation with the plaintiff was left between them.

Thus, unless there are other special circumstances, the above KRW 100 million, which the plaintiff remitted to the defendant, should be careful in assessing the donation as the defendant's assertion.

Therefore, in this case, deeming that the above KRW 100 million was loaned to the defendant as alleged by the plaintiff is more consistent with the rule of experience.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from July 25, 2014 to the date following the day when the original copy of the instant payment order was served on the Defendant, as requested by the Plaintiff, to the day when the instant judgment was rendered.