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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

A. The Plaintiff is a person working as a golf protocol in a golf driving range from around 2011, and the Defendant is a person who was working as a waterway in a female group “C” around 1999-200.

B. On April 15, 2013, the Plaintiff remitted total of KRW 1,5490,000,000,000 on April 22, 2013, KRW 5 million on April 26, 2013, and KRW 5 million on five occasions, including KRW 4.2 million on May 20, 2013, to the Defendant’s mother D’s account.

C. On the other hand, on December 18, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming the repayment of the instant monetary amount against D on December 18, 2013 (2013 Ghana District Court Decision 2013 Ghana64852). The Plaintiff was sentenced to the judgment of dismissal of the claim on July 23, 2014, which became final and conclusive around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, significant facts, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, Gap evidence 6-2, 3, Gap evidence 7, 8, and 11, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant loaned KRW 15,490,000 to the Defendant five times in total upon the Defendant’s request for a golf loan from around April 2013 at a golf driving range where the Plaintiff had been working. The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant lent KRW 1,549,00 of the instant money to the Defendant, and sought a return of the instant money against the Defendant.

In regard to this, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff established a new business entity abutting on the golf business and the entertainment business with E, etc. around April 2013, and that the Defendant provided the Defendant with the instant money for the purpose of receiving the waterway belonging to the Defendant, such as the down payment, management expenses, entertainment activity expenses, etc., and that the Plaintiff claimed the Plaintiff’s claim.

B. In this case where the person who received the instant money from the Plaintiff 1 did not dispute over the Defendant, even though there is no dispute over the fact that the parties received the money per se, the Plaintiff is involved in the cause for the receipt of the money.