1. The Defendant’s KRW 43,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from December 5, 2014 to June 2, 2015 to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 13, 2013, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 10 million in C’s account designated by the Defendant, KRW 25 million on February 25, 2013, KRW 10 million on May 4, 2013, and KRW 3 million on August 12, 2013, respectively.

B. As to the above A’s KRW 10 million on February 13, 2013, and KRW 20 million on February 25, 2013, the Defendant borrowed KRW 30 million on February 25, 2013 and repaid until August 30, 2013, and drafted a letter of loan stating that “the Defendant shall assume the responsibility for the civil thought at the time of default”.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim occurred between February 13, 2013 and August 12, 2013, and between August 12, 2013, the Plaintiff lent KRW 43 million to the Defendant as the Defendant’s fund for construction of a new building.

On the other hand, with respect to the retaining wall construction between Gwangju City D and E, between F and G, D, H, and I (hereinafter “instant retaining wall construction”), the Plaintiff contracted the said retaining wall construction on the condition that only material cost of the retaining wall construction is paid to the Defendant.

Accordingly, on February 25, 2013, the Plaintiff first paid KRW 5 million to the Defendant the above retaining wall construction cost.

However, among the above retaining wall construction works, the defendant completed only between D and E, D, H, and I, did not complete the construction between F and G, and did not settle the cost of retaining wall construction.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 48 million, including the above loan debt of KRW 43 million and the above retaining wall construction cost of KRW 5 million paid by the Plaintiff, and damages for delay.

B. First of all, we examine the Plaintiff’s loan claim, and examine the following circumstances, namely, the fact of finding the Plaintiff’s loan claim, each of the facts acknowledged under paragraph (1) above, evidence, and the entire purport of the pleading in Gap’s evidence No. 4, and the Defendant also acknowledged the fact that the money received from the account under paragraph (1) C is borrowed money, and the Plaintiff remitted money to the above C account, and the Defendant possessed the loan certificate.