1. The Defendant’s KRW 30 million and the following day from July 8, 2016 to February 3, 2017 to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 17, 2014, the Plaintiff leased KRW 100 million to the Defendant and received reimbursement from the Defendant.

B. On December 31, 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to operate a cafeteria in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (Seoul Mapo-gu) with the Plaintiff’s expenses, and the Defendant’s profits are divided by 1/2.

C. Around October 2015, the Plaintiff terminated the same partnership with the Defendant, and on October 17, 2015, paid KRW 70 million to the Defendant in the name of repair expenses.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 5, purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination

A. According to the facts acknowledged as the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 30 million (i.e., KRW 70 million paid with the above loan KRW 100 million) and damages for delay calculated at each rate of 5% per annum under the Civil Act from July 8, 2016, the day following the day on which the instant complaint was served on the Defendant, to February 3, 2017, which is the date of the instant judgment, to the day on which the Defendant rendered the instant judgment, deemed reasonable to dispute as to the existence or scope of the obligation to repay, and 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day to the day of full payment

(A) The plaintiff asserts that the interest should be paid at 5% per annum from the date of lending the money because the defendant paid the interest. However, the plaintiff's assertion is not accepted as long as both parties acknowledge that there was no interest and payment agreement at the time of lending the above KRW 100 million.

The defendant's argument concerning the defendant's argument asserts that, while arranging the partnership relationship in October 2015, the plaintiff would receive KRW 100 million at the expense of the plaintiff, set off the above loan debt amounting to KRW 30 million, and therefore, all the claims and obligations were adjusted as above.

The plaintiff, while arranging the partnership relationship with the defendant under the condition that the plaintiff should receive 30 million won from the defendant, he remitted the total amount of 70 million won as claimed by the plaintiff without deducting it.