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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

A. The Plaintiff is the mother of C, and the Defendant was the husband of C, but was divorced on or around December 2015.

B. On April 10, 2009, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 200 million from E, Co., Ltd. on April 10, 2009, with the Plaintiff’s husband D as “one hundred million won (within three years per annum) and seven percent per annum (payment on April 15, 2009).” The Plaintiff transferred the above borrowed money to the Defendant on April 15, 2009.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 5 (including each number, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff transferred 200 million won to the Defendant on April 15, 2009. The Defendant did not pay the above amount to the Defendant. Thus, the Plaintiff claimed against the Defendant the above loan amount of KRW 200 million and damages for delay.

B. The Defendant lent KRW 15 million to the Plaintiff on August 25, 199, ② KRW 2 million on February 15, 200, ③ KRW 25 million on March 4, 2004, ④ KRW 4 million on April 12, 2005, ⑤ KRW 49 million on April 27, 2005, ② KRW 30,238,520 on April 28, 2005, and KRW 72 million on April 28, 2005, and the Plaintiff paid to the Defendant on April 15, 2009.

Therefore, we cannot accept the plaintiff's claim based on the premise that the plaintiff lent KRW 200 million to the defendant.

(1) to specify each of the above money (hereinafter referred to as "the above money") . 3. Determination

A. The burden of proving that the lending of money has been done on the part of the claimant.

However, in order to recognize that there have been multiple monetary transactions between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and that there exists a lending agreement as asserted by the Plaintiff with respect to part of the lending agreement, there must be specific evidence. Accordingly, each statement of evidence Nos. 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 24, and 25 submitted by the Plaintiff is insufficient to recognize it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

(b).