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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Therefore, the reasoning of the judgment of this court is as follows, except for adding the following "2. Additional Judgment" to the argument that the plaintiff lent KRW 50,000,000 to the defendant in the court of first instance, the witness E in the third part of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be dismissed as " witness E in the court of first instance", and as such, it shall be cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. On May 8, 2017, the Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion lent KRW 50,000 to the Defendant.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff KRW 50,000,000 and damages for delay.

B. Determination 1) Even if there is no dispute as to the fact that money was given and received between the parties, if there is a dispute as to the fact that the reason for granting the money was leased, the fact of lending shall be proven by the Plaintiff (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 72Da221, Dec. 12, 1972; 2014Da26187, Jul. 10, 2014). 2) In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the fact that the Plaintiff paid KRW 50,00,000 to the Defendant on May 8, 2017 is not a dispute between the parties.

However, in light of the following facts and circumstances, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize the fact that the cause of delivery of KRW 50,000,000 was leased, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise.

① When paying KRW 50,00,000 to the Defendant, the Plaintiff did not separately set the due date or interest, and did not prepare objective data proving the lending of the loan, such as a monetary loan contract or a loan certificate.

② The Plaintiff shall pay the said money directly to the Defendant.