1. As to the Plaintiff KRW 105,00,000 and its KRW 50,000 among them, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 55,00,000 from October 5, 201, and KRW 55,00,00.

1. According to the purport of Gap's evidence Nos. 2, 3, and 6 and evidence Nos. 1 through 5 as to the cause of the claim and the whole pleadings, since the plaintiff and the defendant borrowed the interest of KRW 500,000 on June 10, 209, KRW 15,000,000 on June 19, 209, KRW 100,000 on June 209, and KRW 15,000 on June 26, 2009, KRW 15,000,000 on April 12, 2010, and KRW 150,000 on April 5, 201, and KRW 201,000,000,000 on June 15, 2010 after deducting the principal of the loan from KRW 5,500,000,000 on June 11, 201.

2. As to the judgment on the defendant's defense, the defendant asserts that the defendant did not borrow the above amount from the plaintiff, but invested in C and D with the defendant, and that the loan certificate of this case was made up by the plaintiff's coercion and thus, the plaintiff does not have any obligation to respond to the plaintiff's claim.

According to the statement in Eul evidence No. 1, the defendant deposited KRW 44,00,00 in the deposit account on October 5, 2010 after receiving money from the plaintiff, but transferred KRW 42,20,00 to C on October 7, 2010. However, the above evidence and each of the statements in Gap evidence No. 2 and No. 3 are acknowledged as being comprehensively considered the whole purport of the pleadings. In other words, the borrower of this case stated that he is the defendant, and there is no indication about C or D, and the person who received the above borrowed money from the plaintiff is the defendant, and the defendant is the defendant, and the defendant is the above borrowed money.