대여금
1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked;
2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.
3...
1. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant is obligated to pay the remainder amount of KRW 9,00,000 and delay damages to the Plaintiff, on July 11, 2013, since the Plaintiff lent 14 million to the Defendant from April 11, 2013 to May 2, 2013. As such, the Plaintiff was paid KRW 5 million from the Defendant on July 11, 2013.
Therefore, according to Gap evidence No. 1-1, although the plaintiff transferred the money to the defendant under a monetary loan contract between the plaintiff and the defendant, it is deemed that the plaintiff transferred the money to the defendant as a total of KRW 14 million (hereinafter "the money of this case"), but there is no evidence to acknowledge that the money of this case was a loan under the monetary loan contract between the plaintiff and the defendant. The plaintiff's assertion that the money of this case was a loan under the monetary loan contract between the plaintiff and the defendant should be proved. The plaintiff's assertion that the money of this case was a loan under the monetary loan contract between Gap and 5 (including number 5) is insufficient. The plaintiff's assertion that the loan of this case is a loan of this case is insufficient.
2. If so, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed as it is without merit. Since the part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair in conclusion, it is so revoked, and the plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.