1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 29 million to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Plaintiff’s counterclaim from March 8, 2018 to January 24, 2019.

A principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall also be deemed a principal lawsuit and counterclaim.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 29, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a monetary loan agreement with the Defendant for loans amounting to KRW 40 million and with the maturity of payment and interest without agreement.

B. The Defendant: (a) KRW 5 million around October 19, 2016; and (b) KRW 2 million around June 30, 2017; and (b) the same year to the Plaintiff.

6.7.Around 5 million won, for the same year.

7.31.31.2 million won around the same year;

8. Around 31.3 million won, a total of KRW 16 million was remitted.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 1, 3, 6 evidence, Eul 1 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Of the Plaintiff’s claimed money paid by the Defendant, KRW 5 million was remitted to C under the Defendant’s instruction to the Defendant, and the remainder KRW 11 million was paid, but the principal of the loan remains KRW 38,509,000 if it was first appropriated to the interest rate of KRW 5% accrued at the interest rate.

B. As to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant did not have any interest on the loans from the Plaintiff, and the Defendant remitted KRW 5 million on October 19, 2016 to the Plaintiff, and repaid KRW 1,717,00,000,000 to the Plaintiff’s computer repair cost on December 2, 2016.

In addition, since the defendant lent KRW 100 million to the plaintiff around September 2013, the claim is offset against the claim.

3. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, there is no agreement on the interest and the due date when the plaintiff lent KRW 40 million to the defendant, and thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the loan amounting to KRW 40 million to the plaintiff and the delay damages, unless there is any special circumstance.

B. The Defendant asserted that the Defendant’s repayment defense was for the repayment of the instant loan amounting to five million won as of October 19, 2016, and thus, the Defendant transferred the instant loan amount to the Plaintiff on October 19, 2016 as seen earlier. However, according to the Plaintiff’s evidence No. 3, the Defendant’s transfer of KRW 5 million, as claimed by the Plaintiff, to C was confirmed immediately after the Defendant’s request.