Of the part of the lower judgment on damages for delay in counterclaim, 46,846,958 won against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) shall be deemed to have been incurred.

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the grounds of appeal by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court is justifiable to have determined that the Plaintiff was obligated to return the money collected as above and interest interest accrued therefrom to the Defendant as unjust enrichment, as long as the Plaintiff’s attachment and collection of KRW 49,293,090 among the Defendant’s deposit claims based on the first instance judgment of the provisional execution declaration of this case, which was based on the premise that the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff; hereinafter “Defendant”) borrowed KRW 50,00,00 from the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant; hereinafter “Plaintiff”) on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning, and the Plaintiff did not have any reason to file the instant lawsuit. On the other hand, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the formation of the authentic document, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

2. The statutory interest rate under the main sentence of Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, Etc., which was amended by Presidential Decree No. 26553, Sept. 25, 2015; and effective October 1, 2015; the statutory interest rate under the main sentence of Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, Etc., was revised by 20% per annum, which was the former statutory interest rate, to 15% per annum; and Article 2(1) of the Addenda, Article 2(2) of the Addenda provides, “Notwithstanding the amended provisions of this Decree, the former provisions shall apply to cases where the first instance trial is pending in court at the time this Decree enters into force, and the legal interest rate for cases for which the first instance trial has not been closed as of September 30, 2015.”