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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Since only the defendant appealed against this, the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the loan claim of KRW 25,00,000 in total around July 2015 and around March 2016, which was accepted by the first instance court.

2. Basic facts

A. On April 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendant came to be in school with each other on the first time and around April 2017.

B. On July 5, 2015, July 6, 2015, and July 5, 2015, and March 5, 2016; March 7, 2016; March 8, 2016; and November 23, 2016, the Plaintiff remitted total of KRW 30,000,000 (hereinafter “instant money”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 (including a provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

3. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that there was no dispute between the parties as to the fact that there was a receipt of money but the loan was lent is proved by the burden of proof on the Plaintiff who asserted that the loan was lent.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Da26187, Jul. 10, 2014). Meanwhile, it cannot be readily concluded that the cause of receiving and receiving money is a donation immediately on the grounds that two persons exchange and receive money are both men and women having a relationship with one another. Whether it is a cause of granting and receiving money ought to be determined by comprehensively taking into account the background leading up to giving and receiving money, economic situation and specific living relationship between the parties, amount of

In other words, the amount of the delivered money is not so big that it takes up in the property or remuneration of the provider, and it is also possible to respond to the request of the other party in the situation where the funds are insufficient.