1. The Defendant’s KRW 36,00,000 and the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from January 24, 2019 to August 20, 2019.

1. The facts that the Plaintiff and the Defendant provided teaching services from around October 2018 and they were hedging around December 2018, 2018, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 36,000,000 to the Defendant on November 24, 2018, and the Plaintiff transferred KRW 2,000,000 to the Defendant on December 2, 2018 may be recognized either by dispute between the parties or by means of the descriptions or images of the evidence Nos. 1 and 4.

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The summary of the party’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff each lent KRW 36,00,000 on November 24, 2018 to the Defendant’s lending companies, etc., and KRW 2,000,000 on December 2, 2018, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff a total of KRW 38,00,000,000 and damages for delay. (2) The Defendant did not request the Plaintiff to lend money to the Defendant, and the Defendant only donated money by means of indicating one’s own subparagraphs in circumstances where it is difficult for the Defendant to pay.

B. Determination 1) Although there is no dispute over the fact that an exchange of money between the parties to the relevant legal doctrine is a loan for consumption, the Plaintiff is responsible for proving that the cause of the exchange is a loan for consumption when the Defendant asserts that it is a loan for consumption (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 72Da221, Dec. 12, 1972). Meanwhile, the Plaintiff cannot immediately conclude that the cause of the exchange of money is a loan for consumption on the ground that two persons are both men and women having relationship with one another. The determination should be made by taking into account the circumstances leading up to the exchange of money, the economic situation and specific living conditions of the parties, the amount, and the intention of return. 2) On November 24, 2018, the determination on whether a loan for consumption is a loan for consumption, the above recognition facts and evidence Nos. 36,50,000 won, and evidence Nos. 1 and evidence Nos. 1, and the following facts and circumstances are acknowledged by the Defendant around 18, 201.