1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 49,20,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from March 16, 2018 to the day of complete payment.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff associated with the Defendant who worked in an entertainment drinking house, and transferred the Defendant totaling KRW 62,860,000,000 to the Defendant, including ① 5 million on April 25, 2016, ② 54,860,000 on May 9, 2016, ③ 3 million on August 22, 2016.

B. On November 10, 2016, the Defendant prepared the following loan certificate (a evidence No. 1, the Defendant asserted to the effect that it was prepared by the Plaintiff’s coercion, but the statement of No. 1, alone, was insufficient to recognize it) with the Plaintiff.

A Temporary No. 1,400,000 on February 15, 2017. 1, 201,40,000 on March 21, 2017. 1,50,500,00 on April 25, 2017. 1,50,000 on June 18, 2017; 1,300,000 on July 19, 2017; 6, 200 on August 1, 2007; 1,000,00,000 on September 28, 201, 200; 1,40,000 on August 17, 200, 200; 1,50,000 on the Plaintiff’s lawsuit on March 7, 2018;

C. Since then, the Defendant paid the following money to the Plaintiff:

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserts that ① five million won as of April 25, 2016, ② 54,860,000 won as of May 9, 2016, ③ three million won as of August 22, 2016, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 62,860,00 to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the defendant asserts to the effect that, although the loans fall short of ① and ③ loans are made by the plaintiff, the defendant did not pay the plaintiff any amount exceeding eight million won because he paid the sum of ① and ③.

B. (1) Determination: (2) Even if there was an intention of donation between the original Defendant and the original Defendant, who had been the school system at the time of delivery of the money, it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant recognized the duty of return by giving the loan certificate, including the money, to the Plaintiff after determination; (2) As such, the Defendant is obligated to return the money to the Plaintiff up to the amount.

(2) The Plaintiff did not have any evidence to prove that the above loan certificate was made by the Plaintiff’s coercion. (2) However, the Plaintiff did not have any evidence to the Defendant.