1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff remitted to the Defendant KRW 5 million on November 13, 2014, KRW 5 million on December 21, 2014, KRW 25 million on December 21, 2014, KRW 2500,000 on December 29, 2014, KRW 5 million on April 25, 2015 (hereinafter “instant loan”), and KRW 3 million on January 5, 2015.

(hereinafter “instant separate loan”). B.

On April 6, 2015, the Defendant remitted KRW 3 million to the Plaintiff.

C. On September 11, 2017, the Defendant was indicted for committing the crime that the Defendant acquired the instant loan of KRW 17.5 million by fraud at the Gunsan Branch of the Jeonju District Court.

(Court 2017No. 1071, hereinafter referred to as the “instant criminal case”). D.

On July 18, 2018, the above court acquitted the defendant of the above criminal facts on the ground that "the plaintiff merely appears to have remitted the loan of this case with money for gambling with the knowledge that the defendant would use it for gambling, and it is difficult to view that the defendant deceivings the plaintiff or borrowed money from the plaintiff without the intention or ability to repay the money."

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, 4, Eul evidence 1 and 2, Eul witness C's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff KRW 20.5 million and delay damages therefor.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant’s assertion that the instant loan was lent to the Defendant as gambling money, and thus, the Plaintiff did not claim the return of the instant loan as illegal consideration, and the instant separate loan was repaid.

B. The following circumstances can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the facts charged with the determination of the illegal consideration claim and the purport of the entire arguments in the aforementioned evidence. ① The Plaintiff, in the instant criminal case, was able to use the “SIE” at a store in the friendship room in which the Plaintiff conducts a drink, and was able to use the card game too well, and the Defendant’s friendly group of employees of the drinking house was flickly informed of the card game.