1. The Defendant shall pay KRW 85,040,00 to the Plaintiff KRW 5% per annum from July 4, 2015 to January 29, 2016, and the next day.

1. In full view of the Plaintiff’s loan to the Defendant, the Plaintiff’s entire purport of the argument as to each of the Plaintiff’s loaned KRW 192,50,000,000, as in the separate sheet remittance details from May 19, 2005 to November 29, 2006, is recognized.

The plaintiff alleged that he deposited KRW 50,000,000 to the defendant's account on February 28, 2005, but it is not sufficient to recognize it solely with the statement of Gap 5, and there is no other evidence.

The plaintiff asserts that he lent the above money to the defendant.

In regard to this, the defendant's wife C only used the bank account of the defendant and his family members, including the defendant, while making a monetary transaction over several hundreds years, and did not borrow money, and C prepared a letter that the sum of all debts incurred in the transaction under his/her own name and his/her family members would pay KRW 200,000,000 on April 7, 2009, and the above remittance amount of the plaintiff was also included in the above letter (the plaintiff claimed payment of the above letter against C and D in Seoul Western District Court Decision 2013Gahap5886).

In full view of the statements in Gap 1, 5, 4, and 3, among the money deposited from the plaintiff's account from the same defendant's account, the client for deposit is divided into the defendant or C, etc. The defendant filed an individual rehabilitation application with the Seoul Central District Court and entered the defendant's loans of KRW 40,000,00 in the table of rehabilitation creditors; and as of April 7, 2009, not only C but also D as of April 7, 2009 as the debtor, while the defendant is not recorded as the debtor, it is recognized that the above remittance details were traded with Eul using the bank account under the name of the defendant and the amount of such transaction was written with the defendant on April 7, 2009.