1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 49,00,000 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and its related amount from March 19, 2013 to November 20, 2013.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Determination on the main claim

A. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, and Eul evidence Nos. 6 as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff (the plaintiff corporation of the previous trade name before the alteration) made a loan of KRW 70,000,000 to the defendant around January 27, 2003, and agreed to receive KRW 35,000,000 from the end of May and June 2003.

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff a loan of KRW 70,000,000 and damages for delay, unless there are special circumstances.

B. In full view of the purport of the argument in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2 as to the Defendant’s assertion on the payment of KRW 5,000,000 on March 26, 2003, and KRW 16,000,000 on May 30, 2003, the Defendant transferred to the Plaintiff KRW 5,00,000 on March 26, 2003, and KRW 16,000 on May 30, 200 on the ground of the repayment of the instant loan.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of this part of repayment is with merit, and the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 49,00,000 won (70,000 won - 5,000,000 won - 16,000,000 won) and damages for delay calculated by the rate of 5% per annum as prescribed by the Civil Act from March 19, 2013 to November 20, 2013, which is the day following the delivery of the complaint, the delivery date of the complaint, to the defendant's objection, unless there are special circumstances.

(2) In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement No. 19 of May 9, 2003, the Defendant transferred KRW 50,000,000 to the Plaintiff on May 9, 2003, in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings.

The defendant asserts that the above amount was repaid by the loan of this case, while the plaintiff asserts that he received part of the loan of 120,000,000 won on October 1, 2002.

In light of the following circumstances, Gap evidence 1, 3, Eul evidence 3, 6, 7, Eul evidence 8-1, 2, Eul evidence 20, Eul evidence 20, and witness evidence D's testimony, which are acknowledged by considering the whole purport of the pleadings: