2. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

2. Even though there is no dispute as to the fact that there is the number of money between the parties to the sales market, the reason that the Plaintiff received the money is a monetary loan for consumption, and the defendant bears the burden of proving that it was received due to a loan for consumption if it is asserted that it was received due to the loan for consumption, and the transfer of money to another person's deposit account may be made based on various causes, such as donation, repayment, investment, etc. in addition to a loan for consumption. Therefore, it cannot be readily concluded that such transfer was made in conformity with the intent of the parties to the loan

As to the instant case, there is no dispute between the parties that the Plaintiff remitted KRW 4 million to the Defendant’s account on January 21, 2013 and January 17:56 of the same day, and around 18:49 of the same day. However, the Plaintiff did not have any motive or interest that the Plaintiff first lent to the Defendant by electronic transfer without any security, and according to the evidence No. 1, No. 1, No. 2, and No. 3, the Plaintiff’s cash withdrawal limit is 6 million won, and the Plaintiff appears to have all of them at the casino. Thus, it is difficult to recognize that the Plaintiff lent the Defendant the above KRW 4 million to the Defendant by requesting the Defendant to use it. The Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit, in light of the fact that there is sufficient reason to use the Defendant’s account.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim shall be dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with different conclusions, and thus, the defendant's appeal shall be accepted.