1. The Defendant’s KRW 110,168,00 for the Plaintiff and the following: 5% per annum from June 25, 2015 to September 17, 2015.

The defendant is the husband of the net C (name D before the opening of the name, death on October 12, 2012, hereinafter referred to as "the deceased"), and the defendant and the deceased are married.

The plaintiff is the deceased's words.

On February 11, 200 5,80,000 Check withdrawals from February 11, 2003 to the Agricultural Cooperative’s account under the name of the Defendant No. 30,000 on February 25, 2003, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 1,000,000 in the name of the Defendant No. 30,300 on March 7, 2005 to the account under the name of the Defendant No. 30,000,000 on May 3, 2006, or deposited KRW 5,50,000 from the Defendant’s account under the name of the Defendant No. 10,50,000 on December 10, 208 to the account under the name of the Defendant No. 30,000 on May 3, 30, 200, the Plaintiff received KRW 30,000 in the name of the Defendant No. 30,000.

As of February 14, 2003, 200,000 won cashier's checks withdrawn by the Plaintiff on February 11, 2003 by the deceased

2. 17. The bank presented and used it.

[Grounds for recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2 through 4, 29, 30, 34 and Eul evidence Nos. 15 (including various numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the purport of the whole pleadings as a whole, the purport of the plaintiff's assertion as to the purport of the whole pleadings is as follows: the plaintiff lent a total of KRW 115,300,000 to the defendant, who was the father, without fixing the interest agreement or the due date of payment from around 2003 to 2010; and on May 3, 2006, the plaintiff was repaid KRW 40,000.

Therefore, the Defendant should reimburse the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 75,300,000.

The defendant denies the above lending of money.

Even if the Plaintiff’s transfer of money to the Defendant’s name account, or the withdrawal from the Plaintiff’s account, the Defendant received the money from the Plaintiff without any relationship with the Plaintiff, so long as the Defendant’s transfer was to the Defendant.