1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 60,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from March 30, 2017 to the day of complete payment.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant married with C on July 22, 2003, but divorced on December 2016.

The plaintiff is the mother of C, and D is the father of C.

Eul borrowed cash cash in the beauty room on September 6, 2014.

“A” has the honor to repay at any time the cash in his custody at any time.

A: Defendant D, B:

B. On August 30, 2014, the Defendant and C drafted a cash custody certificate with the following contents with the Plaintiff’s husband D.

On January 13, 2015, this Certificate shall be prepared, signed and sealed in order to receive on January 13, 2015 and to ensure the receipt (storage) of the above amount.

Reasons for storage: The custodian shall be kept regularly for the purpose of establishing the store, and the custodian shall return it at any time at the request of the requester.

Defendant 1, Plaintiff 1

C. On January 13, 2015, the Defendant prepared a cash custody certificate (hereinafter “instant cash custody certificate”) with the following content to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 5, 9, Eul No. 3-1 and 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 60 million with the cash custody certificate of this case, barring special circumstances.

Around August 30, 2014, the Defendant and C established a beauty room by borrowing KRW 60 million from the Plaintiff. Since the Defendant only prepared a cash custody certificate of this case to secure the above KRW 60 million at the request of C, which may cause voluntary disposal in the process of changing the name of the beauty room lease contract to the Defendant, the Defendant and C did not borrow the money stated in the cash custody certificate of this case from the Plaintiff. Since the above KRW 60 million borrowed from the Plaintiff was fully repaid, the Defendant did not bear the obligation based on the cash custody certificate of this case.

However, the defendant's argument is not only consistent with the statement of the cash custody certificate of this case, which is a disposal document, but also the defendant.