1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

3. The judgment of the court of first instance is rendered in accordance with paragraph (1).

Basic Facts

On September 7, 2012, the Plaintiff lent KRW 8,000,000 to the Defendant, who is the representative of the Plaintiff’s former wife D, 1% of interest per month, and without setting the maturity period, and remitted KRW 8,00,000 to the Defendant’s account under the name of the Defendant (hereinafter “instant loan”).

On October 10, 2012, the Defendant remitted KRW 2,050,000 in total to the Plaintiff’s account under the Plaintiff’s name.

From November 10, 2012 to December 12, 2013, the Defendant deposited KRW 60,000 per month in total as interest rate of KRW 60,000 for the remaining principal amount remaining after repayment on October 10, 2012.

[Grounds for recognition] In light of the above facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 17, and the facts of the judgment as to the ground for a claim as a whole, the plaintiff is a person who has received interest payment of the remaining principal amount of KRW 6,600,000 until December 2013, 2013. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay 6,600,000 (i.e., principal amount of KRW 6,00,000 from January 2, 2014 to October 7, 2014) as requested by the plaintiff, and to pay interest of KRW 20% per annum from October 28, 2014 to the day following the delivery date of the original copy of the instant payment order.

D, the Defendant’s assertion as to the Defendant’s assertion, was the same as that of the Defendant, filed a divorce lawsuit against the Plaintiff on April 9, 2014, and finally, D, instead of giving up the Plaintiff’s right to claim the reimbursement of the instant loan, concluded conciliation agreement between the Plaintiff and the parties to divorce. Since the Plaintiff transferred the right to claim the reimbursement of the instant loan to D, the Plaintiff paid KRW 6,000,000 in total to D around October 10, 2014 and January 12, 2014, the Defendant did not have any obligation to return the remaining principal and interest of the instant loan to the Plaintiff.

Judgment

In the process of conciliation of divorce lawsuit between the plaintiff and D, the plaintiff is in this case.