1. Defendant B’s KRW 18,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from May 10, 2014 to May 8, 2015 to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On November 26, 2012, the Plaintiff, an employee of the Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, transferred KRW 18,000,000 to the Defendant C’s account, which was under the premise of marriage with his/her father and wife.

B. On December 2012, Defendant B paid an additional amount of KRW 7,460,00 to the said money, and Defendant B paid a total of KRW 2,546,00,00 to Defendant D’s ground housing (hereinafter the instant housing) where the Defendants were residing.

C. Around September 25, 2013, the Plaintiff notified the Defendants’ daughters in writing.

[Based on recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1, 6, 7, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4-6 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff asserted as the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim. (A) The Plaintiff loaned the Defendants KRW 1.5 million on November 1, 2012, KRW 28 million on November 26, 2012, KRW 18 million on November 26, 2012, ③ KRW 5 million on June 19, 2013.

B) Even if not a loan, the Plaintiff was requested by Defendant B to bear the Defendant’s housing repair cost, and transferred KRW 18 million to Defendant C’s account that Defendant B known. As long as the Plaintiff was not married with the Defendants’ wife, the Defendants are obligated to refund the Plaintiff’s test cost. (A) The Defendants’ assertion that the Defendants borrowed the Plaintiff’s total amount of KRW 28 million from the Plaintiff’s assertion. (b) The Plaintiff transferred KRW 18 million from the Plaintiff. However, this was merely the Plaintiff received the test construction cost upon the Plaintiff’s request that the Plaintiff shared the Plaintiff’s house residing in Korea.

B. According to the evidence evidence Nos. 3, 4, 6, and 7 as to the claim for loans 1 on the market, the Plaintiff’s withdrawal from its own account on November 1, 2012, and the fact that the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 5 million from E on June 19, 2013.

However, the above evidence alone is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff lent the Defendants a total of KRW 10 million on November 1, 2012 and June 19, 2013, and there is no evidence otherwise.

On the other hand, the plaintiff is defendant.