1. The Defendant’s KRW 117,200,000 as well as 5% per annum from July 11, 2017 to January 30, 2018 to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. From August 3, 2009 to April 28, 2017, the Defendant served for the Plaintiff Company.

B. The Plaintiff paid the Defendant KRW 99 million on August 17, 2012, and KRW 31 million on August 18, 2012, respectively.

C. Under the premise that each of the above amounts is a loan, the Plaintiff deducted 1.4 million won from each of the Defendant’s benefits on August 2012 and September 2012, 2012 as a repayment. D.

On September 2014, the Defendant paid KRW 10 million to the Plaintiff out of the interim settled retirement allowances received from the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry of Gap evidence 1 to 6 (including virtual number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) upon the Defendant’s request, the Plaintiff lent KRW 130 million as above at the rate of 6.3% per annum; (b) on December 2012, the agreement changed to 5% per annum; (c) as seen above, KRW 2.8 million, which was deducted from the Defendant’s salary, and KRW 10 million paid by the Defendant, was appropriated for the agreed interest and principal; (d) as such, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the principal and interest of KRW 149,365,340 (the principal amount of KRW 128,565,090, KRW 20,80,250) and delay damages.

B. The defendant's assertion that he joined the company of the plaintiff increased the sales volume of the plaintiff, and the defendant had concerns over the reduction of sales volume to retire in around 2012, and the plaintiff has donated it free of charge for the purpose of the defendant's housing purchase fund to prevent the plaintiff from departing from his office.

3. Determination

A. The following circumstances revealed prior to the recognition of a loan and the evidence cited by the Defendant are insufficient to recognize that the Defendant contributed to a considerable portion in the increase in the Plaintiff’s sales, i.e., the evidence presented by the Defendant is insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendant contributed to the increase in the Plaintiff’s sales. ② Otherwise, it is difficult to find out special circumstances that the Plaintiff contributed to a free donation of KRW 130 million to the Defendant. ③ If a free donation was made as alleged by the Defendant, the Plaintiff paid it