1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 63,60,000 and the interest rate of KRW 12% per annum from March 1, 2019 to the date of complete payment.

In fact, the plaintiff and the defendant are siblings, and the plaintiff is sentenced to punishment and the defendant's birth.

The Plaintiff remitted total of KRW 76,600,000 to the Defendant’s children C and D’s account as follows.

- C: 60 million won on January 18, 2006; 1 million won on March 22, 2006; 1 million won on May 16, 2006; 1 million won on August 29, 2006; 200 million won on May 29, 2007; 200 million won on May 29, 2007; 30 million won on July 23, 2007; 3 million won on April 15, 2008; 3 million won on April 15, 2008; 3 million won on August 26, 2008; 2 million won on August 26, 2008; 3 million won on May 1, 2005; 200 million won on May 28, 2008; and 3 million won on the Plaintiff as follows:

On January 5, 2010, KRW 200,000, KRW 3 million on April 28, 2011, and KRW 8 million on August 8, 2011, the Plaintiff is a defendant on August 6, 2017; November 26, 2018; and December 26, 2018.

The text message sent to repay the money described in the subsection.

[Ground of recognition] In the absence of dispute, Gap 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 (including additional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply)'s statements, and the plaintiff's claim purport of the whole argument as to the ground of claim as to the whole of the pleadings, the plaintiff did not provide for the defendant's loan of money and the agreement on the repayment period and interest, and lent a total of KRW 76,600,000 to the plaintiff's and the defendant's children's account designated by the defendant. Of them, the plaintiff was paid KRW 13 million, and damages for delay shall be claimed from the day following the day on which the copy of the application for the payment order of this case was served to the day of full payment.

[Judgment of the court below]

B. In the event of a transfer of money to another person’s deposit account, such transfer may be made based on various legal causes, such as loan for consumption, donation, and repayment. Therefore, it cannot be readily concluded that there was the intent of the parties to the loan for consumption solely on the fact that such transfer had been made, and dispute over the fact that money was given and received between the parties.